One of the advantages of Crisis Watching in China is that there’s such a large community of observers dedicated to this country that you are never short of ideas. The downside is that with so many voices it is difficult to make sense of the whole thing. To the question in the title, for example, depending where you look you can find today the whole range of answers: yes, no, badly, take it easy!

What is most remarkable is how fast opinion is shifting towards the Yes side, when only 2 months ago most people still believed China’s system was immune to Financial Crises.

Especially interesting is the story of the closing factories on the Pearl River Delta, which has captured the imagination of western media in the past few days. Fortunately we have some sensible China bloggers to shed light on this mess. The guys at All Roads and the Law Blog are the first to question the significance of the events.

Factories are closing sure enough, and this picture I stole from the bbc website is not an evil western media setup. But take a closer look: do you see any difference between this “workshop” and any random car parking? Do you see any traces of heavy fixed equipment, hoisting devices, utilities? anything looking like proper working lights for the operators? It looks exactly like what it is, a precarious facility quickly improvised to catch some coming contract and quick to disappear the minute things start to look bad. It is probably in places like these that they put together the fakes sold at Qipulu.

So it is mostly the fat of the economy that is being lost for the moment. Business which probably would end up closing anyway in a normal economic system that didn’t have as many holes as the Chinese. The bread and meat of the economy are still producing, and doing quite well given the circumstances. The disappearing of these companies will make things easier for the ones remaining, eliminating the pressure of their (sometimes unfair) competition. It’s part of the good effects of a downcycle, really overdue in an economy that’s been racing nonstop for the last 30 years.

So from my point of view the Crisis has still not hit China in any significant way. The international economic slowdown is definitely starting to show, but for the moment we are still riding it better than most of the Western economies.The Wall is holding strong.

Now, what Crisis really means is what by now is in everybody’s mind. The New Republic calls it Crash and Burn. But many observers around the world got excited about the recent protests in the Delta, and failed to realize that those protests are essentially no different from the many other Crack and Burns that happen daily in China. If it is not a taxi strike, it is a drowned kid or citizens unhappy with relocations.  Each of them for their own reason, and usually with no intention to question the role of the central government, but rather trying to call its attention to help against local injustice.

Crack and Burn we have had for years, and it didn’t do much to unstabilize the system, because it was never meant to anyway.

But here is a method to estimate what might happen if some day the Crisis really hits China:

1. Google “Riots China”
2. Collect the first different 50 results
3. Add up the number of people violently protesting in those results
4. Add the thousands of people that are going to lose (or not find) jobs in the year to come.
5. To that reactive core you can add hundreds of millions of unhappy peasants, too isolated to organize protests on their own, but happy to ride along if there is any serious movement.
6. Now all those millions of chinese  put them together at the same time to protest against the same problem. Typically inflation, unemployment, corruption, injustice or inequality.

When there is a critical mass of unemployed and discontent rioting in a particular region, this could spark the chain reaction and spread to the whole country like gunpowder.

Looking at the economy today, I think we are still far from that situation. On the other hand, I also think that, if it ever happens, it will happen so suddenly that none of us will even smell it coming.

This weekend the leaders of the most powerful countries in the world met up in Washington to discuss how they are going to pull us out of the big economic mess where we are stuck deeper day after day. After a refreshing dinner in the white house including quail, lamb and Vermont brie, the leaders were in a position to promise “vigorous efforts” to fight against the crisis.

Looking at the the reactions from within and without the Summit, it is surprising how peaceful it has been compared to others in the past. No protesters on the streets, no colourful accusations of irresponsibility, nobody even remembered to mention Irak or bash the French. The leaders of the world have understood that the time is not for funny gags. The financial crisis is looming on each of our countries, and we have to stand united. Are we turning the page into a new phase of collaboration in the international community?

For the moment,  these are the main points agreed upon:

• Stabilize banks and boost growth – This includes bailouts and Economic “stimulus”. There is no more than a general statement in this Area, no commitment by any of the States.
• Better Regulation of Financial Markets – Supervision of banks and credit-rating agencies, scrutinize executive pay, tighten controls on complex derivatives, etc. This one was pretty obvious.
• IMF Reform – This is were China and the other developing countries put pressure to have a voice in the exclusive US-EU club. It is likely that they will succeed, and IMF will gain some credibility from that (but gain in efficacity does not not necessarily follow)
• Commitment to an open global economy  – Free market, no barriers to trade or investment. A point that all countries big and small have agreed upon. Hopefully their policies will remain consistent with this statement.

In conclusion, nothing to write home about. What with all the Bretton Woods II measures that where going to change the economy of the XXI Century? Not yet. There will be a follow-up meeting in April 09, and by then some specific plans may be ready for discussion. There hasn’t been time to mature any serious ideas. And anyway, he who shall be in charge of leading the effort could not join the party this weekend.

Indeed, together with the Brie cheese and the lamb, there was a hot potato served for dinner last Friday. And one that nobody is eager to open up, but rather roll on swiftly from plate to plate until it gets to its final destination, president elect Obama. The minute he steps into his office in January it will be there waiting for him, wrapped up in Christmas paper.

In this sport of potato rolling, the Chinese have long been masters. Their words are measured and dictated by wisdom. Thus spake President Hu Jin Tao:

• Reform [of the international financial system] should be conducted in a comprehensive, balanced, incremental and result-oriented manner.
• A comprehensive reform is one that has a general design and includes measures to improve not only the international financial system, monetary system and financial institutions, but also international financial rules and procedures.
• A balanced reform is one that is based on overall consideration and seeks a balance among the interests of all parties
• An incremental reform is one that seeks gradual progress
• A result-oriented reform is one that lays emphasis on practical results.

This sounds very much like Deng’s “Groping stones to cross the river”, an approach which was very effecive to tackle a delicate process of transition like China’s, but not necessarily to avert a crisis. Some famous analysts have long been speaking against this kind of solution.

And then, one wonders how this fits with the aggresive stimulus package that was supposedly launched last week. That was certainly not an incremental announcement. But who knows, it is not for us mortal bloggers to understand the ways of the Popular Repubic.

Just as I was writing the previous entry, I came across this article on the NYT about the packet of fiscal measures that China is taking to the upcoming G20 meeting in Washington. The $586 Billion Stimulus Plan has been announced today on the government website. I was surprised I hadn’t seen it come on Xinhua, but here it is.

It is good news that China, as opposed to the Bush administration in the States, is taking measures to prevent the Crisis before their system has actually started to melt. It proves that, while they continue to give a reassuring image of solidity to the outside, Chinese policy-makers are well aware of the delicate situation of the economy and the risk of the crisis hitting them badly. Hopefully, the rest of the world will take note of this and stop believing that China is going to solve everybody’s problems.

After cutting interest rates and loosening up the credit conditions last week, China is following up with a plan to spend 4 trillion yuan over the next two years on 10 different areas, including infrastructure, tax-cuts, environment, technology and social welfare (in unspecified proportions). It is difficult to imagine how China can increase even more its investment in infrastructure when already every road and township in the country is a construction site. Still, with their margin of action in monetary policy limited by their own currency regime, fiscal is clearly the way to go.

More interesting in the long term is the investment in environment and social welfare, which should work together with the announced land reform to bring all those millions of Chinese peasants into the economy. As I said in my previous post about the Crisis, this move, which is very much in line with Mr. Hu’s and Mr. Wen’s harmonious political ideas, will hardly have an effect rapid enough to prevent the crisis. But it is nevertheless good news that, from these times of economic turmoil,  something good will come to the dispossessed.

After all, it might very well be that a serious crisis is actually needed in this country for some people to realize the importance of equality, solidarity and justice.

Today was the opening ceremony of the 7th China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition of Zhuhai, the main fair of the industry in China. These last days, my Xinhua reader at the bottom of the page has been spitting some interesting news for the occasion, and international media have been quick to follow.

Everybody in China seems to be speaking this year about the development of a Chinese aircraft industry, that is, when we are not busy speaking of baby milk, olympics and taikonauts. Rumours abound of some brand new A320s bought by chinese companies which mysteriously disappeared from the market, and reverse engineering is in everybody’s mind.

In any case, the clear aim of the chinese government is to enter by 2015 the exclusive club of large commercial aircraft manufacturers, adding a third leg to the industry dominated by Airbus and Boeing, and trying to take a slice of the $3.2 trillion market expected over the next 2 decades.

The big news of the day is the signature of a contract for the supply of 5 ARJ21 medium size regional aircrafts to GE, one of the world largest lessors of commercial airplanes, with an option to acquire another 20 units under unspecified conditions. Xinhua highlights the headline China to sell 25 regional jets to U.S. market, but in fact GE will be leasing the 5 acquired units to chinese airlines, so the planes will be flying locally.

In case someone is surprised by the daring move of GE, it might be useful to explain that GE is also one of the largest airplane engine manufacturers, and China one of their most promising markets. Sure enough, China is making use of its market power, in a similar way as EU and US have used theirs in the past to support their flag aviation companies.

It is just as well, of course. It is clear by now that only a company counting with the support of a world economic superpower can make it in the difficult industry of large commercial carriers. But even with this support, the road shall be long and difficult for the Chinese.

In the first place, they have a long way to go in R&D, and many have serious doubts that they will manage to have their jumbo jets in the market by 2015. However, I wouldn’t expect this to be the major obstacle. Chinese have proven to be extremely fast in re-developing complex technologies, especially when they are already existing in the market. Some planned acquisitions of undisclosed foreign companies by the end of this year will grant even faster access.

The main objection from my point of view has to do not with technology, but with the tricky world of free consumer choice. A field which has typically proven more elusive to chinese reverse engineering than  advanced rocket science.

If there is a market where pristine reputation is essential, and especially in the areas of quality and safety, that is the market of commercial aircrafts. It is probable that by cutting into an oligopolic situation, and counting on some dumping practices, the chinese manufacturers can slash the current prices of Boeing and Airbus for similar airplanes. But who will be buying them? In other terms, who wants to fly in a chinese brand airplane, even at a discount fare?

The problems with safety of chinese products are very present in the world , with various scandals being uncovered every year. Made in China was already a synonym of cheap and unreliable, now it also means unsafe. It will take many years before this world spread perception can change and anyone feels comfortable enough to fly in a chinese airplane. Much longer than it will take to reverse engineer an A320.

Add to this that the major players in the industry, with strong lobbies in the 2 largest economies in the world, will make sure that everyone has a clear perception of the risks involved. And for all its political clout, China is still astoundingly hopeless at pulling the thin threads of international media to play her game, as James Fallows brilliantly explains in this much commented article.

In the field of image and communication, one First blunder can already be noted: on the day of the 7th Zhuhai fair, the Company (or companies) still doesn’t have a Name.  Indeed, the confusing conglomerate of state owned companies that develop the different models of airplane are completely unknown to the world, and even to most chinese. Note, for example, that the Xinhua article refers to the nascent jumbo aircraft company as COMAC, whereas the AP and Bloomberg reporters linked above call it CACC (!). Both are tentative efforts to simplify the original: Commercial Aircraft Company of China.

There is some serious branding work to do now, and it should be done as soon as possible. Hopefully China has learnt her lesson, and she will not be calling her new aircrafts “The Great Wall Aviation Company”, as in this hilarious old post that I found over at Imagethief.

Whatever they do, It seems clear that for a long time the airplanes will be limited to the chinese market, and only at a second stage they might manage to make it out of the country in any significant quantities.

It is a very long term bet, which is not based only on its uncertain economic returns. Clearly, political, strategic and military considerations enter the calculation of the chinese government. All things taken into account, the move can be a good one for China and for the rest of the world, ultimately improving the conditions for the final consumer.

It has been said many times that the large aircrafts market can only support two players in the world, justifying the near monopoly situation of Airbus and Boeing. It is very possible that in the long term China proves them all wrong, and many business books will need to be rewritten.

But before we get there, some things will really need to change in this country.

During my travels these last weeks in Europe and Asia, and on my return to China, I have observed some rather striking contrasts. So much that they made me think a lot about the present state of Chinese economy, and here is a word about it.

Two different ways of seeing the world

I was in Europe for the last time the week that Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy – some call it already “Meltdown Monday”. Pretty scary, but the news didn’t seem surprising for anyone there.  Ever since the beginning of the year most people had seen the crisis coming. On the Spanish beaches, there were less tourists to be seen this summer, and the variable rate mortgages were getting stiffer for all. The governments that were not in electoral campaign had profusely announced what was to come.

That same week, during a congress in Lyon, the American guest from the marketing consultancy came out to the stand and presented the prospects of our industry up to 2010. He had a very professional looking PowerPoint with some colourful graphs that vaguely reminded me of the slides in a waterpark. The delegates from the rest of the countries looked bored, and only we – New Delhi, Kuala, Shanghai – were hurriedly taking notes. Nobody had shown us that back home.

The whole atmosphere I encountered in Europe was in stark contrast with what I had seen and what I am living still today in China. The crisis has not yet touched this country. The taxi drivers at the airport, who usually know a good deal of economics, don’t even mention the word crisis. On the corporate side, the contrast is even bigger. Most of my local clients, who take a WSJ for breakfast every morning, are not only not worried, but they actually look at the future with renewed optimism. They know that a big crisis (危机) is also a big opportunity(机会). In an intuitive language like Chinese, the two words share one single character.

The Great Wall of China

The prevailing thought here seems to be that of the Great Wall of China: Confident and proud of their financial system which has resisted the negative western influence, Chinese at all levels are convinced that the crisis will not hit them hard. To reassure them, there is the precedent of the 1997 Asian financial crisis, which devastated the Asian tigers’ economies and left China, the only country strong enough to ignore the  western blunderer IMF, mostly unscathed.

The media here have already been speaking about the crisis for a while, but always as an external problem, and with a generally positive outlook. The official Chinese press is prudent as usual, but the general idea still seems to be that China shall be the word’s bastion of stability against the irresponsible western financial devices. Thus the official discourse goes: Growth to slow down mildy, there will be some  restructuring to boost the domestic markets, and we will come out stronger in the end. And in everyone’s mind is the opportunity for Chinese companies to go out shopping for deals in capital thirsty western counterparts.

Of course, Chinese are aware that international markets are the weak link, as a large part of the GDP is made up of exports to western countries and FDI. But they count on two factors  to ensure the minimum of vital growth required by the system. On one hand, the massive ongoing investments in infrastructure that expand their tentacles day after day to each end of the country. On the other hand, they bet on the development of Asian markets to counter the descent in Western demand.

In view of all this, the new priorities of the technocrats, as they explained last week in our industry briefing in Beijing, are: 1- Develop the markets to find a way out for Chinese production, and 2- Take advantage at the worst of the crisis to go out and acquire foreign companies, and achieve through these means the creation of truly global corporations, with an access to know-how and technology which is much more direct than that obtained from FDI.

The Great Wall of China, the myth that for millennia has defined the Chinese people, is born again in the realm of finance. And, shielded behind it, the sons of the Dragon hope to regain the glory of past times.

A weak point in the Wall

There are however some signs indicating that Beijing’s plans might not work out so cleanly. In the first place, although the Chinese financial system, entirely controlled by the government, has indeed remained more conservative than the western one, this does not make it in itself an efficient system. A series of failed investments in the near past, such as Blackstone or Bear Sterns are good examples. And the opacity typical of the large Chinese banks, heavily influenced by the Communist Party, is not precisely the best guarantee of success.

It should be noted as well that the very foundations of the Great Wall, the massive reserves of foreign-currency held by the Chinese government, may not be the solution for every problem. Most people in China fail to understand that the foreign-exchange reserves are not free assets, and cannot be used freely by the government without seriously affecting its monetary policy, or rather, as professor Michael Pettis calls it, its currency regime. Indeed, until the domestic market is strong enough, China will be forced to keep the RMB as low as possible to keep up with the exports, which will completely condition the freedom of its policies.

Looking at the markets, already several observers have started to note the fall in sales of Chinese companies. It is very doubtful that the Asian Markets can grow sufficiently quickly to absorb the growing Chinese manufacturing output. In the end of the day, Asian markets mean India and Russia, the only two countries with a critical mass to match Chinese needs. They are both strangled by serious structural problems to be able to respond quickly enough to China’s needs. And the hesitating actions taken for land reform to increase the consumption of peasants might be a good idea in the long term, but it sounds very optimistic to bet on domestic consumption in the short term.

Add to this that Chinese economy, in spite of being in the middle of a development miracle, has severe structural problems, partly derived from its political system, as commenter Will Hutton brilliantly puts forward in his book “The Writing on the Wall”.The lack of a “soft” infrastructure, as he calls the ensemble of characteristics of a civil society that are necessary for the proper functioning of a market economy, makes China a very vulnerable system. It is symptomatic, for example, the total lack of internationally recognized brands, or the many cases of mismanagement, such as the recent case of baby milk contamination.

Beijing taken

But there is a much more worrying aspect, which derives precisely from the Great Wall effect. Historically, the Great Wall of China has not been effective to prevent barbarian invasions, and in a way it has often had the opposite effect. The Han people, protected by their Wall, had a tendency to feel invulnerable and live with their back to the North. In 1644, when the Manchus crossed Shanhaiguan, they took the Chinese by surprise. Beijing fell very quickly (to internal rebels in the frst place), and the last of the Han emperors was left with no choice but to hang himself from a Pagoda tree at the Jingshan Hill, right behind his forbidden city. This is History. But it is a story that has too often repeated itself in China, and which can revive under a new shape in the XXI century.

It is well known, and the economic miracle of the last 30 years is a proof of it, that Chinese economy is guided by a corps of well trained technocrats who know very well their subject. And undoubtedly Zhongnanhai must have a Plan B readily prepared for contingencies. But it seems clear that, as much as they might want to prepare, if the crisis hits hard in China, the scope of reaction of the system is very limited by its own structure and its own people.

Indeed, the great majority of Chinese workers, unlike their western counterparts, are ill prepared to face a crisis, let alone to understand it. Ever since the end of the Cultural Revolution, they have only known 30 years straight of growth. The Chinese people has kept silence since the summer of 89, when Deng and the Red Army made them understand that getting rich comes first. Since then they have accepted injustice, inequality and corruption in exchange for national pride and a notable increase in material conditions. The day the system fails to deliver, due to unemployment, inflation, or other crisis effects, the pact of silence shall be broken.

Unlike our governments, the Chinese Communist Party will be unable to shield itself behind an international economic situation that its own people do not understand. And all its legitimacy,  based on economic development and on the dubious legacy of Mao, can vanish overnight. China needs a minimum annual growth to employ the massive wave of peasants that are migrating to its cities, the biggest migration in the history of humanity, as the topic usually goes in China comment books. The leaders know this very well, and the 7.5% of annual growth that they set as a goal in the 11^th Five Year Plan is probably about the minimum they estimate for the whole formula to add up.

It the Wall falls in these circumstances, as in the Ming period, the psychological effect could be devastating. And when the forces of the hundreds of millions are unleashed, the bureaucrats in Beijing might have no other way left than the one of the (political) Jingshan hill.

Possible outcomes

We might be right now at a turning point in the process of development of modern China, which will seriously impact the course of history in the XXI century. This year 2008, the one of the 30 anniversary of the beginning of Deng’s reform, marked by a series of disasters, and rounded off by the spectacular success of the Olympic Games, might well be the year in which everything changes. In the Chinese tradition, natural disasters, and earthquakes in particular, have long been omen of political change. The last serious earthquake was, precisely, in 1976.

Whatever happens, whether the Chinese Wall resists or not, the international crisis shall precipitate many changes in China, and in the rest of  the world we shall do well to keep a watchful eye on these events, because they shall have a major impact on our own lives.

If the Wall resists, Westerners will be forced to admit the validity of the Chinese economic system. Chinese capital shall go out to the world. Taking advantage of the opportunities provided by the crisis, Chinese economy may take in a very short period of time a decisive leap, and under the solid supervision of a regime legitimized by its success, it can spectacularly accelerate its progression to become a superpower. In a very short period of time, the most optimistic of predictions for China can become true.

If the Wall should collapse, on the other hand, Chinese economy may suffer a rapid decline, with almost immediate social and political consequences that may drag the rest of the world into a crisis that could go beyond the purely economic. The outcome in this case is much less predictable, and only mutual understanding and tolerance among the peoples of the world will avoid disastrous results.

So is the crisis hitting us or not?

The greatest economists have historically failed to predict crises, and are rather better at analyzing the problem “a posteriori”, finding out that it was all very clear after all. Crises are by definition unpredictable, so the point of this blog is not to guess whether or not the Great Wall of China shall resist this time the barbarians.

Instead, the conclusion is that, whatever the outcome, the role of China in the world is going to change radically as a result of this crisis. In the meantime, CHINAYOUREN will be here to inform you and keep a watchful eye on the Crisis and the Wall.

EDIT1: Deleted little rant against Western Media. Added shameless promotion of CHINAYOUREN.