论文总字数：45021字

摘 要

中美双边贸易在两国对外贸易中占据着重要地位，但与此同时中美贸易摩擦也日益频繁。由于华为在5G领域占据领先地位，美国不悦其在高新领域的主导地位受到挑战，以华为产品的安全问题为由，禁止华为进入美国市场。华为不满美国政府的相关指控，于2019年3月7日宣布控告美国政府。本文即从华为控告美国政府为例，浅析华为与美国政府间的商业冲突的相关报道，进而研究中美贸易摩擦的原因及舆论走向，尝试提出中国在面对目前中美贸易摩擦和未来其他经济体贸易摩擦时可以采取的应对策略。为减少贸易摩擦、促进两国经贸关系健康发展提供参考。

关键词：中美贸易摩擦；华为控告美国政府；新闻报道分析；CDA；应对策略

Contents

1. Introduction………………………………………………………………1
2. Literature Review…………………………………………………………2

2.1 The research of CDA……………………………………………………...2

2.2 The research on Sino-US trade friction………………………………4

1. Research Methods………………………………………………………...5

3.1 Research Questions……………………………………………….......5

3.2 Data Collections……………………………………………………….6

3.3 Data Analysis......…………………………………………………....6

1. Research Results…………………………………………………….6

4.1 Public Attitude……………………………………………………………6

4.2 The Reasons of Sino-US Trade Friction ………………………………...8

4.2.1 Historical Reason…………………………………………………...8

4.2.2 Economic Reason…………………………………………………...9

4.2.3 Political Reason…………………………………………………...10

4.2.4 Technological Reason……………………………………………..11

4.2.5 Legal Reason……………………………………………………...12

5. Conclusion………………………………………………………………..12

Works Cited………………………………………………………………...16

1. Introduction

Since the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States in 1979, trade between China and the United States has grown rapidly. While international trade brings benefits to both sides, trade friction has become a hot topic in the diplomatic history of China and the United States. Since the outbreak of the international financial crisis in 2008, China and the United States have entered an unusually frequent period of trade frictions. At the beginning of 2018, the US provoked a new round of Sino-US trade frictions. This round of trade friction is huge and frequent. On March 7, 2019, Huawei announced that it would sue the American government, which raised the Sino-US trade friction issue to an unprecedented level. Huawei said that section 889 of National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2019 passed by the U.S. congress prohibits all U.S. government agencies from purchasing equipment and services from Huawei without any administrative or judicial process. It also prohibits U.S. government agencies from signing contracts or providing grants and loans to Huawei’s customers. This practice of the US government violates the provisions of the Bill of Rights, due process clause and decentralization clause in the US constitution, and violates Huawei"s right of fair competition. In response to the incident, Foreign Minister Wang Yi announced The Ministry has taken and will continue to take all necessary measures to firmly safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises and citizens.

At present, the world economy remains sluggish. Since President Trump took office, the United States has been increasingly prone to trade protectionism. As China"s economic power grows and trade conservatives of the United States take over the center of government power, the United States and China are bound to have a tough battle over trade imports and exports. For China, which is in the "new normality" stage of economic development, it has become particularly important to successfully transform itself in the changes of the external environment . Therefore, the study of Sino-US trade frictions is of great practical meaning for China"s future economic development and policy making. Nowadays, the research on Sino-US trade friction is mainly based on the unbalanced distribution of international trade interests. There are few studies on Sino-US trade friction from the perspective of public opinion. This paper will combine relevant news reports of Huawei sued the US government and use CDA to discuss the essence and causes of Sino-US trade frictions behind the public opinions, and try to put forward countermeasures that China can take in the face of current Sino-US trade frictions and future trade frictions with other economies.

2. Literature Review

The literature related to this article are divided into two sections: the first is the related research of CDA; The second section is the relevant research on Sino-US trade friction.

2.1 The research of CDA

CDA refers to a linguistic trend emerging from critical linguistics in Western Europe from the late 1970s to the early 1980s. It is a multidisciplinary approach to criticism, heavily influenced by anthropology, sociology and psychology. Different scholars define it from different perspectives.

Dr van Dijk defines critical discourse analysis as a kind of discourse research, which mainly aims to study the way social power abuse, dominance, and inequality. So CDA has resisted such a situation that it has so resisted the capitalist that it has resisted by text and a talk in the social and political context (van Dijk, 2001:352). Wodak (2001) defines CDA as a discourse analysis method that studies language in an interdisciplinary way. She believes the CDA can be used to uncover potential inequalities, injustices and unfair practices in society. In her opinion, CDA is an analytical system to investigate and judge social problems through the use of language to express, constitute and legalize. Wodak also believes that CDA is an interdisciplinary approach to discourse research, aiming to explore the linguistic behaviors in the socially connected natural speech environment. Fairclough (2010), the pioneer of CDA, regards CDA as an interdisciplinary method for text analysis. The CDA sees language as a form of social practice that establishes, replicates, or challenges social and political notification, primarily through text or dialogue. The researches on CDA abroad gained great achievements through many scholars’ efforts in both theoretical and practical facets. Fowler, Hodge, Kress and Trew published the book Language and Control (Fowler et al. 1979), in which they elaborated the relationship between language and social practice and rejected the view of language usage being de-contextualized. Fairclough wrote Language and Power in 1989, in which he gave an explanation ofrelations between language, ideology and power. In this book, Fairclough proposes that in the discourse, the inherent ideology might generate power. In Language, power and ideology, Wodak (1989) highlighted the correlation of investing language usage in institutional settings. Fairclough (1992c) made research on “intertextuality” from its history to its application. Later he (1995) paid much attention to discourse and its related context. Besides, Fairclough(2000) mainly dealt with problems, unfairness, dangers etc in people’s daily life within a particular social order, with the purpose of maximizing social justice and freedom. van Dijk (2001) claimed that scholars should make a study of the role of social representations in terms of cognitive behaviors. In CDA, he proposes the cognitive approach by putting forward the triangulation framework that connects discourse, cognition, society. In van Dijk’s view (2006), only by employing various public discourses, such as news discourse, advertising discourse and parliamentary debates discourse, etc. can one manipulate other people through text. Fairclough (2011) connected argumentation with CDA to analyze the pre-budget reports of UK government, having enriched the study of CDA in political discourse. Graham amp; Doman (2013) applied CDA to clinical teachers’ discourse to study the power among the discourse of curriculum. The foreign researchers have pushed the rapid development of CDA abroad.

The CDA research in China mainly focused on the theoretical aspect. Later, some researchers made empirical studies of CDA. In the book An Introduction and Evolution to Critical Linguistics, Chen Zhongzhu, for the first time introduced social, philosophical and linguistic basis together with the development of Critical Linguistics into China in 1995. Since then, many domestic researchers have started the study of CDA. Xin Bin (1996) claimed that the research objects of CDA included public discourse, such as official documents, newspapers, advertisement, laws and regulations etc. He also (2002) pointed out the reasons why systemic functional linguistics was selected as the methodological resource of CL and summarized the methods of CDA. Xin Bin (2006) proposed that the study of CDA, especially, in regard to analysis of discourse, should be conducted from the social-historical, psychological and cognitive perspective. Ji Weining amp; Xin Bin (2009) examined Fairclough’s achievements in CDA since 1989, illustrated his dialectic view of discourse and key concepts of CDA, and analyzed the development of his three-dimensional model. Ji Yuhua amp; Li Xichun (2011) summed up the definitions of “critical” in CDA from different researchers and commented the main viewpoints about CDA made by prominent critical linguists. Chinese researchers make great contributions to the application of CDA in different fields. Xin Bin (1998) carried out a study on the news discourse of reported speech to analyze the discourse-pragmatic functions and drew a conclusion that in reported speech, the editors imposed their viewpoints on the readers implicitly. Tian Hailong (2002) analyzed the real meaning of political discourse and studied its formation and development and the methodology of the political discourse research. Han Jinlong (2005) made a study on the advertisement from critical perspective to analyze the representation of intertextuality, the textual and pragmatic function. Huang Xiyun (2006) studied the American economic news reports and carried out a critical discourse analysis on the news reports on China’s economic growth in The New York Times. The author found that American biased reports about China’s economic growth, regarding China’s economic growth as antagonistic to other interests and a threat to these interests. Liu Ling (2013) conducted a comparative analysis of Chinese and American media’s news reports on appreciation of RMB from the perspective of CDA. The study concluded that Chinese media adopted a moderate reporting strategy with avoidance, but the American media held a strong tone and hegemony to force Chinese government to revalue exchange rate of RMB. Many scholars focus on the inaugural speech of Obama and carry out their critical analysis.

2.2 The research on Sino-US trade friction

There are many related studies on Sino-US trade frictions, most of which focus on the current situation, characteristics, causes, influences and countermeasures of Sino-US trade frictions.

Yang Zhe (2010) analyzed the characteristics of Sino-US trade frictions from the following aspects: the scale of Sino-US trade frictions, the products involved in Sino-US trade frictions, and the amount involved in Sino-US trade frictions. Hu Yinyin (2006) believes that Sino-US trade frictions have the following characteristics: the objects and fields of trade frictions keep expanding; Trade frictions are becoming more frequent but less likely to antagonise each other; The tendency of politicization of economic and trade frictions has increased. Trade deficit, intellectual property protection and investment liberalization will be the focus of Sino-US trade frictions in the future. Yang Zhe (2010), respectively, from the two aspects analyzed the causes of the Sino-US trade friction: the United States: the American domestic trade protectionism, the US export control policy, Sino-US trade imbalance, using some disadvantageous clauses in China"s accession to the WTO agreement, the political analysis on the level of national interest, domestic political pressure, the role of interest groups, discrimination in China; Trade friction between the two countries caused by China: China"s export-oriented foreign trade strategy. According to Wang Yafei (2005), the structural causes of Sino-US trade friction are as follows: the imbalance of American economic structure, the imbalance of Sino-US trade, and the adjustment of regional industrial structure in east Asia. Zhao Yong (2007) analyzed the impact of trade frictions from China and the United States. China"s trade frictions have seriously affected China"s exports, which is not conducive to the adjustment and upgrading of China"s industrial structure, and has formed pressure on the implementation of China"s domestic economic policies. The US side: it is not conducive to the improvement of economic efficiency and economic welfare of the US, is not conducive to the structural adjustment of the us economy, affects the stability and growth of the US national economy, and damages the national interests in the long run. Yang Xin (2010) studied the impact of Sino-US trade friction on China"s foreign trade from both positive and negative aspects, and believed that Sino-US trade friction had the following positive effects on China"s economy and trade: it accelerated the upgrading of product structure, was conducive to promoting the diversification strategy of export market, and was conducive to improving the overall national welfare; Negative aspects: trade frictions harm the normal bilateral economic and trade relations, and "spillover effects" have formed pressure on the implementation of China"s domestic economic policies, and induced other countries to follow suit.

1. Research Methods
   1. Research questions

The commercial conflict between Huawei and the US government lasts for a long time, involving many aspects and events. It is obviously difficult to analyze one by one. In order to have a clear and accurate understanding of this commercial conflict, the author selects relevant reports about Huawei"s suing the US government to discuss the attitude of Chinese and western media towards this event, and makes an in-depth analysis of the reasons behind the trade friction between China and the US, so as to clarify the Sino-US economic relations, keep a clear understanding of the development prospect of bilateral trade between China and the US, and avoid blind confidence or irrational panic. Moreover, it can provide theoretical basis and policy reference for Chinese government to properly deal with trade frictions and formulate corresponding policies and regulations. This paper will combine the following two issues for research. What is the attitude of Chinese and western media towards this issue? What are the underlying reasons of Sino-US trade friction reflected in this incident?

• 1. Data collection

When selecting relevant reports on Huawei"s complaint of the US government, it should adopt a comprehensive and authoritative attitude. Therefore, in the data collection, the author looked up the mainstream newspapers in many countries.Combining the political attitudes and political positions held by these mainstream newspapers. The author selected The Washington Post and Forbes as the basis for public opinion research of the United States; Global Times and China Economy as Chinese media representatives; The Guardian and Suddeutsche Zeitung serve as media representatives of other Western countries.

• 1. Data analysis

In terms of news analysis, the author also refers to the political attitudes and positions held by these mainstream newspapers on the basis of the analysis based on the country where the news report belongs. At the same time, combined with the relevant research methods of CDA, the author not only analyzes the part of speech, sentence pattern and specific use of context words of news sentences, but also puts words and sentences into a specific language environment for analysis. The author will try to interpret the trend of public opinion and the deep meaning of these news sentences in a specific context.

1. Research Results
   1. Public attitude

The Washington Post is a prominent liberal newspaper with a political bent toward President Trump"s republican party. As a result, The Washington Post chose to report Huawei from the perspective of the US government in its conflict with the US government. "How does Huawei Become a Target for Government? " The Washington Post used the word target in its title. "Target" generally refers to the object is being attacked. Apparently, The Washington Post believes that Huawei is in a position to be targeted by the U.S. government in this case against Chinese high-tech companies. In response to "Why does the equipment matter?" When the Post responded: "The U.S. government - like The Chinese and others -- is wary of employing foreign technology for vital communications, for fear that The equipment manufacturers could leave a backdoor that allows their "Home-country intelligence agencies to access information, or that the companies themselves would hand over sensitive data." Apparently, The Washington Post rationalized the U.S. government"s actions as correct. Meanwhile, the use of "leave a backdoor" also reflects The Washington Post"s implicit denigration of the Chinese government and Huawei.

Forbes even describes the business friction between Huawei and the US government as "war" and "battle". Forbes doesn"t think it is a simple trade conflict, it is about 5G of China and the United States lead the battle.

As a newspaper founded by the Communist Party of China, Global Times is more politically inclined to the Chinese government. "This is a desperate attempt by Huawei to fight back after the US intensified its crackdown and persecution," Global Times said in its report. Global Times called the US government"s accusations of cyber security threats a "crackdown and persecution". This statement clearly indicates that Global Times believes that the measures which are dishonorable and unjust. Global Times called Huawei"s action a "desperate counterattack", which also shows the company"s tough situation and its unyielding spirit in the face of difficulties. "We support Huawei"s hiring of the best and most famous lawyers in the western world," reflected the support and praise of Global Times for Huawei"s approach.

"Huawei"s US government lawsuit may lift the air of "mystery" around the Chinese telecoms giant," the title of the irony mentioned the word "mystery". As is known to all, the United States denied Huawei access to the American market for fear of being spied on. However, the US government could not provide evidence. Huawei has also consistently claimed that it did not engage in any violations of U.S. law and that there were no security issues with its products. The word "mystery" was not a common meaning in the text, which was China Economy"s response to the U.S. "s defamation of Huawei. "Members of Congress said they were giving Huawei the corporate death penalty because of fears of what Huawei has done in the past and might do in the future." The term "death penalty" usually refers to the deprivation of life by an offender for an unforgivable crime. Huawei"s participation in the construction of 5G in the United States is a normal commercial activity, while the remarks of the United States Congressman indicate the rejection and crackdown of the United States government on Huawei’s legitimate activities.

The Guardian is more radical in its liberal, democratic politics. Its audience is devoutly middle-class liberals focused on ending all wars and rolling cigarettes. The Guardian in the report proposed "Is Huawei a friend or foe in the battle for 5G dominance?". In the question, the Guardian uses the word foe. "Foe" is neutral, stressing that the foe is not necessarily the enemy. Foe is obviously less serious than enemy, which is a political enemy. What’s more, the use of interrogative sentences clearly reflects that The Guardian treats the business conflict in a wait-and-see attitude. The Guardian also quotes John Suffolk. As Huawei"s chief security officer and the UK government"s former chief IT adviser, John Suffolk also presented neutral opinions in a certain extent. Moreover, The Guardian has tended to describe the commercial conflict more as a competition than a war.

Sueddeutsche Zeitung holds a critical liberal position in domestic affairs and supports liberal economy in economic policies. So its attitude of the American government is understandable. Suddeutsche Zeitung uses "Streit" to describe Huawei"s complaint against the U.S. government. "Streit" means to "quarrel". Clearly, it considers the commercial clash as little more than a trade friction between China and the United States over 5G leadership. Suddeutsche Zeitung simply called it a "Warnung" in response to U.S. government pressure on Germany. Warnings, not demands. It is clear that Suddeutsche Zeitung does not take the United States seriously.

• 1. The reasons of Sino-US trade friction

4.2.1 Historical reason

Because of the tradition of trade protectionism and economic nationalism, the United States passed the tariff act of 1789. The United States believes that trade protection can guarantee the stable and healthy development of the U.S. economy. This is associated with the history of the United States was once a British colony. Before independence, the United States had to engage in unfair trade with Britain. Therefore, American people deeply believe that they can protect their own trade through high tariffs on foreign products.

Trade wars are handy for America. Throughout modern history, both the former Soviet Union and post-World War II Japan have experienced trade wars with the United States, both of which were initiated when their economies reached about two-thirds of the size of the United States. The United States forced Japan to sign the plaza accord through the 301 investigations and the protection of the so-called intellectual property investigation, which eventually led to the rapid appreciation of the Japanese currency, the increase of the domestic bubble, the collapse of the Japanese housing price, the Japanese economy into a mire of more than 20 years, and the long-term stagnation of development. On April 3, 2018, the office of the United States trade representative released a list of imports from China under investigation 301 that recommended a 25 percent tariff. The list contains about 1,300 separate tariff items worth about $50 billion. Roughly speaking, in the tariff list released by the United States, the main products involved include pharmaceuticals, electrical and motor equipment, mechanical equipment, transportation equipment and parts, optical medical instruments and other instruments, most of them are concentrated in high-end manufacturing industry, but most of them are parts and few of them are complete machines. The US announced tariffs on China in this area because both it is an important area of global competition and it is more likely to have a material impact on China. The United States argues that Chinese policies, which force American companies to transfer technology and intellectual property to Chinese companies, have helped China gain a head start in these high-tech sectors. This is completely different from the past anti-dumping and anti-subsidy policies of the us in the middle and low-end sectors. This means that the United States attaches great importance to China"s industrial upgrading plan and believes that it is extremely urgent to curb the development of China"s high-end industries.

4.2.2 Economic reason

The American economy needs to get out of the way. Since the 1970s, American capital control has been relaxed and financial capitalism caused "deindustrialization", which led to the bankruptcy of old industrial areas in the United States and the surge of unemployment, forming a large-scale "rust belt". The percentage of U.S. manufacturing jobs declined for 65 consecutive years, from 32 percent in 1953 to 8.5 percent in 2017. At present, the gap between the rich and the poor in the United States has increased; social resources are not distributed evenly; the whole country"s social problems such as the lower middle-class continue to be not solved. The American society has been close to the "predator country". To most American people, it seems that, the United States is pushing the economic globalization and trade liberalization, not only did not make the economy better. Instead, a trade deficit increased the loss of manufacturing, rising unemployment and a series of problems, so the lower-middle-class people generally disliked process of economic globalization, and were eager to reuse trade protectionism for self-improvement, to achieve the "industrialization" of the national economy in the United States.

The United States is trying to destabilize other economies while raising interest rates on the dollar and accelerating the repatriation of dollars. The fed withdraws from the quantitative easing policy and plans to raise interest rates further. With the advance of interest rate hikes, the dollar has a tendency to flow back, accompanied by a trade war, which can strengthen the confidence of enterprises in the US economy.

There is no balance between China"s strengths in exports and weaknesses in imports. Although China"s trade dependence on the US is on the decline, it still remains above 4%. In terms of trade commodities, apart from textiles, which China continues to export, there have been significant changes in China"s export commodities in recent years. The proportion of machinery, equipment, electronic products and other technology-intensive products has increased rapidly. Although the advantages of China"s export products is its low price advantage in the market in the United States, therefore it can gain huge benefits. But the American policy restricting the use of high-tech exports to China, lead to import export is not enough to offset the huge deficit, so that the surplus of China and the United States and the trend of the U.S.-China trade deficit are present to expand.

4.2.3 Political reason

They thought they need to curb China"s development. In 2014, China put forward the "2025 plan", specifically in the ten fields of research and development, information technology, numerical control and robot aerospace manufacturing, Marine engineering equipment, new materials, energy conservation and new energy vehicles, biological medicine and high-performance medical apparatus and instruments, advanced equipment, from the perspective of the list of Sino-US trade tariffs, the early stage of the main cover is the top ten in the field of products, in order to curb the export of related products in China, which contain the development of relevant industries.

President Trump has capitalized on the country"s populist mood to make good on his campaign promises. When Trump ran for President in 2016, he had two classic slogans. One was: America first, the so-called America first principle. Another was bringing manufacturing back. Through a trade war, the development of the domestic industrial system, the real realization of the American interests first creed, the old American industrial system to revitalize. After taking office, trump began to promote trade protectionism, including imposing 25% tariffs on all Chinese imports and conducting trade investigations on a variety of imports, in order to fulfill his election pledge against free trade. Believing that China was a major contributor to the rise in U.S. unemployment, Trump signed an executive memorandum on August 14, 2017, authorizing the U.S. trade representative to review "China"s trade practices." In early November 2017, the United States issued a new version of the report "China"s non-market economy status", which ruled that China is a non-market economy country based on the role of the government in the economy and its relationship with the market and the private sector and continued to find reasons for the US anti-dumping against China. On November 15, relevant agencies of the US Congress issued a report, advocating strict regulation of Chinese enterprises" investment and mergers and acquisitions in the US. In early 2018, investment cooperation projects such as ant financials’ acquisition of MoneyGram and Huawei"s distribution agreement with ATamp;T were suspended.

4.2.4 Technological reason

China"s capacity for independent innovation is weak. At present, as a big manufacturing country, China can be in the upstream position in the global value chain in labor-intensive industries such as textile industry, but there is still a lack of independent innovation ability, and high-tech industries tend to develop downstream. China"s low technical independence has always been an important reason for China"s trade barriers. In this regard, some technology-intensive industries such as electrical and optical equipment in China are highly dependent on western developed countries. Meanwhile, with the change of commodity structure in bilateral trade between China and the us, the proportion of technical barriers and green barriers, as new forms of trade protection, in Sino-US trade frictions is gradually rising. By virtue of its scientific and technological advantages, the United States implements strict access restrictions and reviews on Chinese imports, which leads to frequent trade frictions between China and the United States.

4.2.5 Legal reason

Relevant laws and regulations are not perfect. The United States has a relatively complete legal system on trade disputes, including United States Trade and Competition Act 1988, America’s Foreign Trade Law, "Section 301", "Section 337" and "Section 232", etc., while China still needs to further improve its various mechanisms in the face of trade disputes in order to effectively play its positive role. That is why Chinese companies are often in a passive position in most trade investigations launched by the us against China, often settling disputes through direct compensation or the removal of subsidies. In recent years, many enterprises choose to actively respond to the trade investigation in the United States and finally win the lawsuit or settle, which sets a good example for Chinese enterprises. But overall, the response rate of enterprises is still low. Compared with the United States, China has fewer institutions related to trade relief and fewer personnel engaged in trade relief, which leads to low work efficiency and indicates that the awareness of trade relief is not high enough. At the same time, engaging in trade remedy requires multidisciplinary knowledge, such as the composite knowledge of economy, law, language and other disciplines. At present, China lacks relevant talents, which is also the unfavorable factor for trade investigation.

5. Conclusion

Based on the analysis of news reports, it is not hard to find that the mainstream newspapers in the United States hold a slandering attitude towards Huawei"s complaint suing the United States government, believing that this matter is essentially a trade war caused by political factors. Chinese media have characterized it as Huawei"s response to an unfair U.S. government crackdown. Other mainstream countries in the west are taking a wait-and-see approach. Combined with the analysis of relevant data, it can be found that the trade friction between China and the United States involves more factors, tends to be politicized, and has a deeper impact. The trade frictions between China and the United States remind us that compared with the world trade powers, China still lags far behind in terms of science and technology, policies and personnel training. In response, the Chinese government can take the following measures:

Firstly, Chinese government can build an international trade system based on the "One Belt And One Road" platform. At present, the system construction of "One Belt And One Road" is still at a low level, mainly reflected in the effectiveness level of relevant documents. Since China put forward the initiative, more than 100 countries and international organizations has actively participate in the construction, but largely by China and some countries and international organizations that has signed on the memo (including regional cooperation memorandum and border cooperation memorandum and economic and trade cooperation and long-term development planning, etc.). In the long run, the construction of "One Belt And One Road" needs the construction of multilateral system. As an institutionalized cooperation mechanism at the economic level, Free Trade Area, if combined with the "One Belt And One Road" construction, will build an international trade system along the "One Belt And One Road" area and form an institutional platform, which will bring significant and profound changes to the entire international trade system. With the help of the construction of "One Belt And One Road", China can carry out institutional construction around relevant countries, so as to promote the negotiation of super-large regional trade agreements based on the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and regional comprehensive economic partnership agreement.

Second, it is also a good way for the Chinese government to vigorously promote the reform of domestic economic structure and reverse the irrational situation of industrial structure, urban-rural structure and regional structure. In the face of changes in the international trade environment, China should remain determined to deepen reform and opening-up and promote supply-side structural reform. We will resolutely promote the implementation of the country"s major strategic tasks, prevent risks, ensure financial stability, and win the battle against poverty and pollution. We will vigorously implement the policy of reducing taxes and fees, improve the business environment for enterprises, and motivate market players. In response to the situation, we introduced counter-cyclical macro-control policies to ensure steady growth and employment. We will do a good job in piloting domestic free trade ports and take opening up to a new level.

Third, the Chinese government needs to make unremitting efforts to increase investment in human capital and promote economic transformation and upgrading. China"s economic transformation is not based on the will of people, and it needs corresponding supply of human resources to move up the value chain. China"s rural areas still have a large population, and the education level of rural youth is lower than that of urban residents of the same age. We should increase investment in rural education, vigorously popularize middle and higher education, vigorously develop vocational education suitable for emerging industries, and provide qualified human resources for industrial upgrading.

Finally, the Chinese government should establish a modern manufacturing system and encourage scientific and technological innovation. The rapid change of technology is an important background of contemporary international trade and also an important factor to determine the trade balance between the two countries. In recent years, the wave of scientific and technological innovation in China has positive significance for improving the productivity of our country, but at the same time it has formed a certain deterrent to developed countries. To obstruct the implementation of "made in China 2025" and the evolution of "learning by doing" through trade means, thus delaying China"s industrial upgrading and technological progress, and controlling China"s "production boundary" is the strategic consideration of the United States to provoke trade friction. In fact, over the past four decades, China has benefited greatly from its participation in the global supply chain. However, on the one hand, China is at the middle and low end of the global supply chain, and a large number of resources are concentrated in the rough manufacturing industry, playing the role of the world"s factory. China"s advantages in these industries are being surpassed by southeast Asian countries with lower prices, and the growth dividend of the traditional mode is gradually exhausted. On the other hand, with the deepening of the global division of labor, the risks faced by China are also rising. The Huawei incident in the current round of trade conflicts is a manifestation of the risk event. Therefore, from a strategic point of view, China should continue to adhere to the strategic policy of "biding time, stable china-U.S. relations, as far as possible use of trade conflict time window, merger and reorganization of the traditional manufacturing industry, promote the modernization of manufacturing progress, transfer labor and resource intensive industries of the middle and lower reaches of the industrial chain, improve the trade structure in our country. At the same time, Chinese government ought to continue to encourage scientific and technological innovation, promote China"s technological progress, and accelerate the import substitution process of high-end industries. The establishment of the modern manufacturing system will not only help broaden China"s production area, but also help to ensure China"s share in the world output, and more conducive to ensure China"s rise in the global industrial chain, which is the core competitiveness of China"s economy in the future.

Works Cited

China Economy，Huawei’s US government lawsuit may lift the air of ‘mystery’ around the Chinese telecoms giant ,2019-5-2, https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/3005798/us-canada-and-eu-offer-robust-alternative-state-led

Fairclough, N. Language and Power. London: Longman,1989.

Fairclough, N. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press,1992.

Fairclough, N. Intertextuality in critical discourse analysis. Linguistics and Education, (1992)4, 269-293.

剩余内容已隐藏，请支付后下载全文，论文总字数：45021字