Home Contact Us
Search :
IPCS: Research Institutes in India
   

US & South Asia - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Post Comment
#1791, 14 July 2005

China has America over a Barrel

Jabin T Jacob
National Chengchi University, Taipei

When terms like mergers and acquisitions find mention in editorials of the People's Daily, it is time to sit up and notice. The CPC mouthpiece was asking Chinese home appliance giant, Haier, to explain its go-slow on the purchase of American home appliances firm Maytag. Earlier, of course, Lenovo had set the ball rolling by bidding successfully for IBM's PC unit in a $1.75 billion deal. And now, the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) is engaged in a tug of war over American energy firm Unocal with another energy giant, ChevronTexaco. If Washington's displeasure over the IBM deal was a warning to the China to restrain itself, the latter seems to have paid little attention. It seems China is not bothered about a possible reaction like the one that followed the Japanese takeover spree in the 1980s.

The $18.5 billion Chinese bid for Unocal - worth about $2 billion more than Chevron's cash and stock offer - is well-calculated and would make CNOOC a diversified oil and gas company with global reserves. Since China's big corporations are answerable to their government, the strategic implications of the deal are obvious. Besides having Asia's largest LNG reserves, Unocal has a pipeline connected to American strategic oil reserves, and the only rare-earths mine in the US. But CNOOC offered to sell these assets, if that was what it took to win the deal and pledged not to take supplies from Unocal American oil and gas reserves and sell them abroad.

While the Chinese state keeps close tabs on how its companies manage their affairs, it does not mean big and small Chinese enterprises are not developing an appetite for grand endeavours. Also, neither state nor private enterprises are afraid to take risks. In fact, the Chinese have been planning the overseas expansions of the top Chinese corporations, for some time now. The People's Daily editorial, in fact, was bold enough to call, "a few years in the red...just normal" for firms. This is a confidence that will take more than the US's Committee on Foreign Investments, textile quotas or currency revaluation to dent and is borne out by the fact that the CNOOC bid is backed by some of the best American PR and financial firms, including those with ties to the Bush administration.

Speaking of such ties also clarifies why there is more than the usual heat being generated in the US government over Unocal. A conflict of interests in the Bush administration is evident. For one, Chevron has connections with Halliburton, which should make a lot of things self-evident. For another, Condoleezza Rice was a Chevron Director from 1991 until 2001, when she became National Security Adviser. Also, for US Vice President Dick Cheney, China's increasing stakes in Central Asian oil resources provide the backdrop to his ties with Chevron. Cheney had negotiated a 900-mile pipeline from its western Kazakhstan oil fields to the Black Sea on behalf of Chevron. However, Chevron later decided to sell its stake in another oil and gas field in northwest Kazakhstan to China National Petroleum Company International (CNPCIL) in October 2003, as it did not fit the company's "long-term strategic objectives". It is unknown what Cheney had to say to that. Nor does it explain the agreement between ChevronTexaco and CNOOC a few days later to supply about $21 billion of LNG to China over 25 years from the Gorgon Australian Gas joint venture, in which it has a 50 per cent stake.

Perhaps, the bipartisan opposition on Capitol Hill to the deal might stem from the fact that Sam Nunn, former Democrat Senator from Georgia, sits on the Board of Directors of Chevron, which now faces losing its bid to its Chinese rival. However, for over two decades, the United States has not blocked acquisitions of energy properties by Saudi Arabia, Venezuela or Russia, among others. Even The New York Times' Paul Krugman has advocated blocking the Chinese bid, warning of a possible "great game" strategy by the Chinese. As another opinion piece in the People's Daily concluded, the CNOOC bid would "test US sincerity for free trade".

Even if Unocal shareholders vote against the Chinese offer or the administration thwarts this deal, Chinese companies are unlikely to stop looking for deals in the US and elsewhere. If Chinese firms have to face foreign competition at home, why shouldn't the same logic apply to the US? Besides, instead of buying American Treasury bonds (the Chinese central bank finances the massive US trade deficit by $1 billion a day), it makes sense for China to diversify its investments.

For Indian policy makers, there is news from the neighbourhood. In June 2005, China's biggest mobile phone operator, China Mobile, made an unsuccessful $1.4 billion bid for control of Pakistan Telecommunication Company, but as a Chinese analyst put it, this was merely testing the waters.

Rate this Article

Not Rated stars Ave. rating: Not Rated from 0 votes.
View comment(0)
POST Your Comment
No comment for this article
 
 
Article by same Author
Sino-Pak Nuclear Deal: American Perfidy?
Another Sino-Japanese Spat: So What’s New?
Sino-Indian Boundary Dispute: Present Imperfect and Future Tense?
9th Shangri-La Dialogue: Straight Talk, Bluster and Skepticism in Asia’s Choppy Waters
China’s Xinjiang Woes: Internal and External Implications
Sino-Indian Anti-Terror Cooperation: Contradictions Aplenty
China's Pakistan Quandary
A Chinese Puzzle in Vienna
China's Olympic Hurdles: The Three 'Evils'
The Congress (I)'s China Connection
Leadership Change in China and Implications for India
China and the Indo-US Nuclear Deal
India-Taiwan Relations: In Delicate Minuet
Arunachal in the Sino-Indian Dispute: Beyond the Visa Fracas
India and Japan - Towards Permanent Interests
India Missing: The China-Myanmar-Bangladesh Triangle
Assam: Back to Square One
North Korea Goes Nuclear: Fallout Extends Far and Wide
Hu Jintao's US Visit: Can't Hurry Cooperation
India-Japan-US Security Cooperation
India in East Asia: More Than Just Economics
The Meaning of Koizumi's Victory
China and the Indo-US Entente
Beijing Courts Taiwanese Opposition
East Asia Diary - April 2005: Reading the Past in the Present Tense
East Asia Diary - March 2005: History Still a Bugbear in South Korea-Japan Ties
China's Anti-Secession Law: The View from Taiwan
East Asia Diary - February 2005: Japan's Taiwan Gambit -
From 'Look East' to 'Think East'
East Asia Diary - December 2004: The 'East Asia Community' - Promise Aplenty
East Asia Diary - November 2004: The US Presidential Elections and the East Asian Response
East Asia Diary - October 2004: Japan's
East Asia Diary: Of a Grasshopper Challenging a Cock and Other Matters
Hu Jintao's New Uniform: What's the Message for Taiwan?
The Great Taiwanese Vote Trick
Pakistan's MNNA Status: Implications for China
Ruckus over Referendum III: Chinese Reactions
Ruckus over Referendum II: American Dilemma
Ruckus over Referendum I: Taiwanese Moves
Sino-Indian Naval Exercises: Chinese Perceptions
Vajpayee’s Syria Visit: Of Stronger Ties and Missed Opportunities
China and Taiwan Spar in Cyberspace
Suicide Bombers: A New Front Opens in Iraq
The Iranian Nuclear Weapons Issue: A Non-Zero-Sum Game
Female Suicide Bombers: A Political Perspective

 
ADD TO:
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
FacebookFacebook
 
Print Bookmark Email
 
 

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

 
Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map
B 7/3 Lower Ground Floor, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029, INDIA.
Tel: 91-11-4100 1900, 4165 2556, 4165 2557, 4165 2558, 4165 2559 Fax: (91-11) 41652560
Email:
© Copyright 2012, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.