Published on September 24, 2019.
Based on Hidéo Tamura’s column in the monthly magazine Hanada, this essay discusses the perversion of Japanese media over the U.S.-China trade war, China’s trade surplus with the United States, RMB money issuance, military expansion, the Belt and Road Initiative, and the Senkaku and South China Sea issues.

September 24, 2019.
What surprised me was that in Japan there are overwhelmingly many media outlets and intellectuals who side with China.
It is a perversion in which they regard U.S. President Trump as a “protectionist” and, in effect, elevate Chinese President Xi Jinping, who ignores free-trade rules.
This is a chapter published on July 15, 2019, under the title: The total amount of China’s trade surplus with the United States over the ten years up to last year was 3.2 trillion dollars, equivalent to more than 90 percent of the increase in RMB money issuance during that period.
The following is a chapter published on July 30, 2018.
Tamura Hideo is not a commentator who speaks about economics by repeating knowledge borrowed from the Ministry of Finance.
Still less is he someone who merely repeats the editorials of Asahi Shimbun or Nikkei; he is one of the few genuine people who truly understands economics.
The following is from his column serialized at the beginning of this month’s issue of the monthly magazine HANADA, released on the 26th.
Emphasis within the text, other than headings, is mine.
The Perversion of Japanese Media That Denounce Trump.
On July 6, the United States and China each activated sanctions and retaliatory tariffs on imports from the other country, entering into a trade war.
What surprised me was that in Japan there are overwhelmingly many media outlets and intellectuals who side with China.
It is a perversion in which they regard U.S. President Trump as a “protectionist” and, in effect, elevate Chinese President Xi Jinping, who ignores free-trade rules.
First, let us look at the editorial in the morning edition of Nikkei Shimbun dated the 7th.
The headline was “The United States and China Should Withdraw Sanctions and Ease Friction Through Dialogue,” and the content did criticize China, saying things such as “China’s intellectual-property violations, stealing technology and information by various methods, are malicious,” but the conclusion was, “Even so, if they rush into sanctions and retaliation, they will only strangle each other.”
It was as though it were saying that both sides were equally to blame.
And it concluded, “The United States has also activated import restrictions on steel and aluminum against countries other than China. Japan and Europe must also cooperate to contain protectionism.”
Its intention to give readers the impression that “the United States equals protectionism” is completely obvious.
The Asahi Shimbun editorial dated the 4th was titled “Stop the Chain of Retaliatory Tariffs and Protectionism.”
After placing the U.S. import restrictions on steel and aluminum and “high tariffs on Chinese products” on the same level, it lectured the United States, saying that it “should correct its protectionism.”
On NHK’s Sunday Debate on the 8th as well, there were many intellectuals who expressed concern about “protectionist America.”
Western mainstream media are generally critical of Trump’s policies, but they do not categorically define the Trump administration’s hard-line policy toward China as protectionism.
In Britain, the birthplace of the “free trade” theory of classical economics, Parliament, after many years of debate, enshrined free trade as a political principle.
Even when import restrictions were taken, political and journalistic circles did not regard them as “protectionism,” but called them “reciprocity” or “fair trade,” and positioned them strictly within the framework of free trade.
The U.S. Congress and successive presidents have followed this example.
In the 1980s, President Reagan, the “free trader,” called the application of Section 301 of the Trade Act to Japan “fair trade.”
Trump’s line is the China version of that.
In contrast, Japanese economists still treat textbook-style “free trade” as sacred scripture, and half-informed media outlets, intellectuals, and politicians echo them and turn to defending China.
The theory of free trade says that if tariffs and non-tariff barriers are eliminated, and each country specializes in its superior industries and divides labor with other countries, all will prosper.
But if this means abandoning key industries and high technology and relying on imports from other countries, and entrusting other countries with the production of staple foods such as rice, then national sovereignty becomes unnecessary.
Companies that sacrifice domestic employment and produce only in other countries betray their homeland in the name of free trade.
The real international free-trade system is competition among states, and it produces winners and losers.
Its driving force is the political dynamics among states, not empty chanting from economics.
The free-trade rules of the World Trade Organization, the WTO, are the product of compromise among states, and there is no reason to think they are a free-trade paradise.
When only Japanese media outlets and intellectuals, like identical pieces of Kintaro candy, bring up WTO rules over and over and criticize President Trump, it is like exposing their ignorance of international politics.
China is precisely the country that has taken advantage of the WTO system and done whatever it pleased, and, as even pro-China Nikkei editorials admit, its behavior is extremely malicious.
Yet the media do not demand punishment of China for violating WTO rules, but instead condemn U.S. retaliatory measures.
That is what is truly unfair.
What is most serious is the lack of recognition that China’s threat derives from its trade surplus with the United States.
Chinese authorities have absorbed every dollar that flows in, used foreign-exchange reserves as the source to issue RMB, quantitatively expanded finance, and achieved high growth.
The funds for acquiring high-tech U.S. companies and for the Chinese economic-zone concept, the “Belt and Road,” are also based on foreign-exchange reserves.
The total amount of China’s trade surplus with the United States over the ten years up to last year was 3.2 trillion dollars, equivalent to more than 90 percent of the increase in RMB money issuance during that period.
Relying on abundant funds, China advances military expansion, watches for an opportunity to seize the Senkaku Islands in Okinawa Prefecture, occupies and reclaims reefs in the South China Sea, and turns them into military bases.
It draws Japanese, American, and European companies into its expanding market and forces them to provide advanced technology.
It steals technology through cyberattacks and corporate acquisitions.
It launches export and investment offensives against weak surrounding countries, inflates their debt burdens, and when they have difficulty repaying, seizes local infrastructure.
The Trump administration is poised to add 200 billion dollars, then another 300 billion dollars, to the total amount of imports subject to sanctions against China, bringing the total to 550 billion dollars.
Since the total value of U.S. imports from China is 520 billion dollars, the plan is to impose additional tariffs on all imports.
China’s balance of payments surplus is 120 billion dollars, so if its surplus with the United States disappears, China will fall into deficit, and finance will contract.
Then economic and military expansion will stop.
That becomes security for Japan, Taiwan, Southeast Asia, and others.
The main motive of Trump’s policy is “America First,” but for Japan, it is security.
Seeing Japanese reporting that repeatedly shouts “protectionist America,” Mr. Xi must surely be smirking.