presentation for the dissertation
TRANSCRIPT
China’s Strategic Partnerships in Latin America: Case Studies of China’s Oil Diplomacy in Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and
Venezuela, 1991 to 2015
February 10, 2016
Yanran Xu许嫣然
Puzzle and Research Questions
Some applaud the changing foreign policies and the win-win objective of both sides, and portray China as a successful model for developing countries.
Others depict China as a rising imperial power, scrambling for the resources and as a competitive threat to Latin America.
Research Questions (from a Chinese perspective)• What does it mean for China to establish SPs with Latin American
countries in practice from 1991 to 2015?• To what extent is there convergence/divergence among SPs in
terms of rhetoric and/or in practice? /Are SPs one-sided in favor of China or in favor of particular Latin American countries?
Puzzle (“How Strategic SPs Are” is an Open Question)
The Golden Triangle: NOCs (Sinopec, CNOOC and CNPC), the state and quasi-commercial institutions
Literature Review• Realism: hegemonic challenge• Dependency theory: dependent
development• Liberal IPE: economic interdependence• Constructivism: Ideology; alternative development model
Methodology, Methods, Case Selection
• A case study methodology from 1991 to 2015
• Comparative method• Qualitative (primary): structured, focused
comparison, content analysis, archival and secondary source research. • Quantitative: macroeconomic data.
• Cases: Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and Venezuela
Operational IndicatorsThe research outcome or the DV: the balanced deal between China and a Latin American country Operationalization:
—Equitable market access of companies from each country in trade areas;
—China’s foreign direct investment (FDI) for infrastructure;
—China’s portfolio investments/credits/loans;—The employment of Chinese-sponsored
construction or infrastructure projects
The research predictors or the IVs (Operationalization): Hypo 1: If a Latin American country is geopolitically close to the US, then it will gain a more balanced deal from China. (Self-assessed by U.S policymakers)
Hypo 2: If a country in Latin America is more economically interdependent with China than with the US, it is more likely to get a balanced deal from China. (the proportion of trade from a Latin American country to China and the US as the percentage of its total trade)
Hypo 3: If a Latin American country has a diversified economy and is less dependent on a single sector, then it is more likely to gain a balanced deal from China. (The overall GDP by sectors)
Hypo 4: If a country in Latin America has a left-leaning regime that shares common ideological commitments, with China instead of the U.S., then it will receive a more balanced deal from China. (A country’s dominant ideological orientation as articulated by the country’s key ruling elites and/or political party or parties)
Brazil’s oil production counts for 33% in Latin America(Petrobras); China became the major oil export destination in 2010, including oil
exploration and technology research
Domestic lobby groups and corporate interests
Double–edge Sword: relatively diversified but still Concentrate on soybeans, oil, iron ore;
competition in manufactures, low- and high-tech in the local and third markets
China became the largest trading partner in 2009
Lula’s diversification of diplomatic relations since 2000s
Case Study-Brazil (1993)
Venezuela (2001)
Venezuela’s oil production counts for 24% /90% of its exports is CRUDE oil;China: Loans for Oil
Domestic web: The Venezuelan government dominates the economyPDVSA controls the oil industry (The government-PDVSA Strategy)
Concentration on a single sector: OIL
China became the second-largest trading partner in 2009
Chavez’s intensified friendship with China after 1999
CDB loans to Venezuela from 2008 to 2015 (over US$ 56 billion)
Mexico (2003)
Mexico’s oil production counts for 26% (Pemex);since Dec 2013, energy reform
limited cooperation with China: mostly service contracts
Domestic financial oligarchy (large entrepreneurs) has high level of consensus with the government + the China Threat
Mexico (Nieto and PRI) does not have a long-term strategic vision toward China;
to prioritize the economic insertion into North America;to diversify economic exchanges with the EU and within the region
Diversified economic exchanges like electrical equipment, minerals, and metals;
but facing fierce competition in both local and third markets
China became the second largest trading partner in 2003, behind the US
Argentina (2004)
Argentina’s oil production counts for 8.7% /sufficient in oil supply but also import oil products like Mexico/the new Hydrocarbon reform in 2014;
CNOOC and Sinopec have joint ventures with companies like YPF (renationalized in 2012 in 51% stock share by the government), PAE and
Bridas in oil supplies and oil fields operations
Domestic interest groups and protectionist policies against China
Concentration on soy complex & crude petroleum
China became the second largest trading partner by 2009
A friendly political-ideological scenario with two Kirchners’ governments since 2003
Findings: Empirical
Increasing trade and
cooperation;the largest
public creditor(Venezuela>Brazil>Argentina>Me
xico);
FDI:-mainly
Resource seeking;
-market seeking;-efficiency seeking
Interdepen-dent yet asymmetrical• Trade deficits• Bilateral trade
flows unbalanced: e.g.
• competition• Few
investments in China
Export dependency (2008-2014)• Brazil:
increased and high
• Venezuela: highest
• Mexico: increased but lowest
• Argentina: fell, but
• high
Trade frictions;Social & environ-
mentalConflicts;
Labor tensions
Findings: Theoretical • Realist: all four countries have strategic importance to China
+ China’s Energy/food security/profits.• Dependency theory: China has deprived Latin American
countries control over their own strategic assets; a renewed cycle in which the region becomes overly dependent on primary products. –Hamper the competitivenes
• Liberal IPE: Partnerships are asymmetrical but not an absolute zero-sum game.
• Constructivist: ideology does play a role in China’s strategic partnership toward leftist countries in Latin America + China-carefully dealing with the US.
• The SPs are characterized by a positive sum game with unequal gains of trade, and obviously, China is benefiting more from the whole region than vice versa.
• Rather than blaming China, Latin America should build on some of its own recent success, and it is time to design proactive rather than reactive policies.
Findings: Analytical•Brazil: a leading role both regionally and globallyincreasing China’s political and economic presence/South-South cooperation/leverage (attracting investments)new path of high-tech transfer + renewable energy cooperation•Venezuela:at a crisis point+ solely relying on China’s support with the least leverage + China needs reconsideration•Mexico: a high trade deficit + a failure to attract more Chinese loans than Ecuador and the Bahamas. Compare to Brazil, Mexico’s influence on China appears to be faint(lack of strong institutions/academia/private sectors focus solely on China)
firmly in the US sphere of influence.•Argentina: it does not hold a similar rank(second) relative to China (compare to Brazil)vulnerable to external shocks and financial technical defaultbiofuel energy
Thank you!