"De risk" and "decoupling theory" are equally detrimental to global development risks | China | Global
Buenos Aires, July 5th (Xinhua) - "Risk reduction" and "decoupling theory" are equally detrimental to global development - Interview with researcher Bustello from the University of Buenos Aires, Argentina
Xinhua News Agency reporter Wang Zhongyi
Santiago Bustro, a researcher at the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina, recently stated in an interview with Xinhua News Agency that the so-called "de risk" and "decoupling theory" hyped by some American and Western politicians towards China are only a change in rhetoric, and their ultimate goal of containing China has not changed. Both "de risk" and "decoupling theory" are not conducive to global development.
Bustro said that "de risk" appears softer than "decoupling", and this shift in rhetoric actually indicates that Western politicians believe that decoupling from China is already impossible. In other words, the decoupling theory is unpopular.
"Some politicians need a new rhetoric on their relationship with China, so they coined the term 'de risk'," Bustro said. "But the fundamental purpose of 'de risk' and 'decoupling' is the same, both are to curb China's development."
Bustro believes that the main difference between "de risk" and "decoupling" is that "decoupling theory" advocates for a comprehensive cut off of economic ties with China, while "de risk" means limiting and intervening in cooperation with China in some key areas.
He stated that from "decoupling theory" to "de risk", the United States and the West have initiated a series of unilateral trade measures that violate World Trade Organization rules and international practices, causing damage to the global trade system and reducing the efficiency of the global production system. The trade system that the United States and the West are disrupting was established under their own leadership back then, and its actions not only have a negative impact on the global supply chain, but also continue to undermine the global credibility of developed countries such as the United States.
Bustro believes that the fundamental purpose of the United States and the West is to maintain their geopolitical interests and hegemonic position in the international system. Therefore, they have put forward arguments such as "risk reduction" to undermine the common interests of global development.
"Taking the global energy transformation as an example, China is an important supplier of key products such as electric vehicle batteries and solar panels globally," he said. "If the 'risk reduction' of the United States and the West affects this field, it will be difficult for many countries in the world to achieve their energy transformation and carbon peak and carbon neutrality goals, and the common interests of all humanity will be harmed."
Bustro said that the United States and the West should abandon unilateralism and hegemonic practices, abandon creating chaos in the international political and economic environment, and abandon irresponsible rhetoric and practices such as decoupling and de risk. What people of all countries hope to see is a world of peace, stability, and development.
