This earlier post addressed the folly of developing a mercantilist governmental policy in response to the China National Offshore Oil Corp.’s hostile takeover bid for Unocal, which had previously accepted Chevron Corporation’s friendly bid for the company. In this OpinionJournal op-ed, CNOOC, Ltd. chairman and CEO Fu Chengyu takes up that line of thinking in arguing that CNOOC’s bid is actually good for American business interests and poses no threat to those those interests or American security.
In the meantime, in this post, Brad Stetser, senior economist for the boutique firm Roubini Global Economics, has been thinking about the CNOOC bid in the context of the amount of foreign assets that the Chinese accumulate each month by exporting more than they import. Mr. Stetser estimates that the value of those assets is around $20 billion, which is more than the $18.5 billion that CNOOC is bidding for Unocal. Thus, Mr. Stetser notes that it’s a tad absurd to worry too much about the Chinese buying one second tier oil & gas company when the real issue is that China has become the largest creditor of an increasingly leveraged U.S. economy. Stated simply, it doesn’t make sense to object when Communists want to buy U.S. companies, but sell away when the same Commies offer to buy U.S. debt.
Mr. Stetser estimates that China holds $700-750 billion in foreign reserves, and that about 66-80% of that amount is in U.S. dollars. Moreover, Mr. Stetser projects that China will add at least $250 billion to its foreign reserves over each of the next two years. Thus, it is only natural that China would want to diversify its reserves by investing in companies such as Unocal and Maytag rather than just holding Treasurys. Inasmuch as such investments are harder to unload than Treasurys, such investments are good from the standpoint that it is less prone to economic upheavals that could negatively impact the U.S. economy.
Nevertheless, the level of Chinese reserve accumulation and intervention in the global exchange markets is unprecedented, and Mr. Stetser notes that China’s economic policies are challenging the norms that govern international economic relationships. CNOOC’s bid for Unocal is important because it calls attention to the larger issue of how the U.S. has leveraged future earning flows and now must begin servicing that indebtedness. Thus, rather than focusing on CNOOC’s bid to overpay for a second tier U.S. oil & gas company, the real issue that needs to be addressed in Washington is whether it’s in the U.S. national and economic interests to continue being a massive debtor to China. Washington Post columnist Robert Samuelson echos these thoughts in this timely op-ed from today’s edition.
The Cnooc bid
I have not said much about the CNOOC bid
CNOOC’s bid
Larry Ribstein and Tom Kirkendall offer up some provocative insights on CNOOC’s controversial bid to buy Unocal.
Chinese holding of reserves is one thing. Even $1 trillion in reserves is probably less than 10% of the value of all of our publicly-traded productive assets (Wiki says total capitalization was $10.7 tril in 2003, which seems light to me, but I can’t find anything else at the moment), and maybe less than 5% of all productive assets. That $1 tril in reserves is more than I’d like to see–it’s manageable in the short term, but it needs to be fixed in the long term by forcing the Chinese to let the yuan float.
But, when a foreign government (CNOOC is 70% Chinese government owned) starts acquiring another country’s productive assets, that country basically allowing its national sovreignty to go slip-sliding away. I would have no objections to this if CNOOC were a truly private company. But, it’s not.
The free-marketeers who either support this or who aren’t opposing this ought to tell us why Chinese nationalization of an $8 billion (sales) company is OK, when we know that if the American government wanted to nationalize Unocal for $18 billion, these same people would be going bonkers.