"When Trade Stops, War Starts" Jack Ma Warns As China Protests US Sanctions On Iran

Tyler Durden's picture

Having recently accused the US of 'wasting $14 trillion on war instead of its people', China's second richest man, Jack Ma, continued to voice his concerns to President Trump on a recent trip to Australia, warning retreat from globalization will only result in trouble.

While meeting US President Donald Trump last month, Ma announced Alibaba would help to create a million jobs in the US, but speaking in Melbourne, where the e-commerce giant Alibaba opened its Australia and New Zealand headquarters, RT reports that Ma warned...

“Everybody is concerned about trade wars. If trade stops, war starts,”


“But worry doesn't solve the problem. The only thing you can do is get involved and actively prove that trade helps people to communicate,”


The globalized economy is more than just transactions of money and goods, according to Ma.


“We have to actively prove that trade helps people to communicate. And we should have fair trade, transparent trade, inclusive trade,” he said.


“Trade is about a trade of values. Trade of culture,” said the billionaire, stressing that he felt a personal responsibility to fly more than a hundred thousand kilometers in the past month to promote global commerce.

Jack Ma spoke with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull on Friday about creating ‘a regional e-hub’ a trade zone allowing freer online business with less border bureaucracy to deal with... which for now appears not to include the US.

Furthermore, Ma's words came at the same time as Reuters reports that China on Monday said it had "lodged representations" with the United States over Washington's new sanctions list targeting Iran, which includes Chinese companies and individuals.

The sanctions on 25 people and entities imposed on Friday by President Donald Trump's administration, and came two days it had put Iran 'on notice' following a ballistic missile test.


Those affected by the sanctions cannot access the U.S. financial system or deal with U.S. companies, and are subject to secondary sanctions, meaning foreign companies and individuals are prohibited from dealing with them or risk being blacklisted by the United States.


The list includes two Chinese companies and three Chinese people, only one of whom the U.S. Treasury Department explicitly said was a Chinese citizen, a person called Qin Xianhua.


Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said that Beijing had lodged a protest with Washington, and that such sanctions, particularly when they harmed the interests of a third party, were "not helpful" in promoting mutual trust.


"We have consistently opposed any unilateral sanctions," Lu told a regular press briefing.

Executives of two Chinese companies included on the list said on Sunday they had only exported "normal" goods to the Middle Eastern country and didn't consider they had done anything wrong.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
thesonandheir's picture

It isn't fair trade though and never has been.


We should be making the high tech stuff not you.


In return we will buy rice and whatever.

Laowei Gweilo's picture

Plus, Ma is not entirely wrong.

Though to be fair, I think President Trump would agree.

I still don't buy the line that he's any more likely to start 'war' than Clinton -- if anything, Trumps self-interest in his empire and children's business will guide him away from war. He's a protectionist, not a globalist hawk -- unlike Clinton.

Who, unlike Trump with actual global business assets at threat, is vindicative and is carrying hawking military aspirations and baggage from decades of enemies made either through her husband or herself, and -- not unlike the Bushs and Iraq -- she is eager to settle the score with all those who wronged her.

In what would would Trump, with all his assets and connections in either Russia OR China, and focus on protectionism not policing the world, be more likely to start conflict than the globalist vindicative hawk Clinton with nothing to lose and her legacy as world police to gain. Trump has a clear history of working with and investing in Russia, China, Middle East. The Clinton's have one of war and hawkish globalism.
NotApplicable's picture

The idea of a trade war in the age of financialized markets is kind of meaningless, no?

It's not like there's any real demand driving production at all anymore. Shit is manufactured merely to provide collateral for the next round of leveraging.

NoDecaf's picture

What is this "fair trade " they speak of?

I still have to pay a tribute to the IRS and central bankers.

evoila's picture

Ma is right, however the question is how do you deal with trade imbalances. When you peg your currency to your military might, then imbalances form. If you peg them to something all countries have in common (gold), then you have imbalances which are reconciled more naturally. That is, inflation forms naturally and is not fabricated, and countries have an easier time dealing with them in the long run.

Richard Chesler's picture

Now that I think about, I could do without any made in china crap.

philipat's picture

China has more reason for concern about tariffs than does Iran about sanctions. Now that China and Russia tradr in RUB/CNY and have Banking systems equivalent to SWIFT they can bypass USD and hence sanctions almost entirely. Tariffs or a Border tax (which will be challenged at WTO) will hurt China a little but will hurt US consumers more (higher prices) and US Corporations even more still because very little of the profit from low manufacturing costs remains in China but is siphoned off through tax havens via Transfer pricing in various forms (Cost of supplied raw materials and pre-assembled components, Royalties, Trademark Fees, Licensing Fees etc.)

JackieG's picture

The media is the tribe.
And the opposition to humanity.
Their allegiance is with the egregore.

Who Controls Big Media? 
Summary: Of the twelve (12) senior executives of the Big Six” media corporations, nine (9) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 75%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population. Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of the Big Six” media corporations by a factor of 37.5 times (3,750 percent).

Who Controls Hollywood? 
Summary: Of the sixty (60) senior executives of the major Hollywood studios, trade unions, and talent agencies, fifty (50) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 83%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population. Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of the major Hollywood studios, trade unions, and talent agencies by a factor of 41.5 times (4,150 percent).

Who Controls Television? 
Summary: Of the sixty-four (64) senior executives of the major television broadcast networks, cable networks, and production companies, fifty-seven (57) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 89%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population. Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of the major television broadcast networks, cable networks, and production companies by a factor of 44.5 times (4,450 percent).

Who Controls Music?
Summary: Of the fifty (50) senior executives of the major music labels and trade organizations, thirty-nine (39) are Jews. This is a numerical representation of 78%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population. Therefore Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of the major music labels and trade organizations by a factor of 39 times (3,900 percent).

Who Controls Radio? 
Summary: Of the forty-six (46) senior executives of the major radio broadcast networks and station owners, twenty-eight (28) are Jews. This is a numerical representation of 61%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population. Therefore Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of the major radio broadcast networks and station owners by a factor of 30.5 times (3,050 percent).

Who Controls Advertising? 
Summary: Of the forty-six (46) senior executives of the major advertising corporations and trade associations, thirty-one (31) are Jews. This is a numerical representation of 67%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population. Therefore Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of the major advertising corporations and trade associations by a factor of 33.5 times (3,350 percent).

Who Controls the News? (Part 1) 
Summary: Of the sixty-seven (67) senior executives of the major television and radio news networks, forty-seven (47) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 70%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population. Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of the major television and radio news networks by a factor of 35 times (3,500 percent).

Who Controls the News? (Part 2) 
Summary: Of the sixty-five (65) senior executives of the major newspapers and news magazines, forty-two (42) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 65%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population. Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of the major newspapers and news magazines by a factor of 32.5 times (3,250 percent).

Who Controls Social Media? 
Summary: Of the twenty four (24) senior executives of the "Big Players" in social media corporations, eighteen (18) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 75%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population. Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of the "Big Players" in social media corporations by a factor of 37.5 times (3,750 percent).

Archive_file's picture

"Shit is manufactured merely to provide collateral for the next round of leveraging."


RiverRoad's picture

Fuck China.  We should have left them in their rice paddies.  Thank you Nixon.

RiverRoad's picture

Fuck China.  We should have left them in their rice paddies.  Thank you Nixon for starting all this globalization shit.

Stuck on Zero's picture

And what mercantilist country hasn't started wars everywhere?

rayborbon's picture

Trade stops war starts not necessarily true. We managed to avoid trading with many countries without having conventional war. Scare mongering.

HRH Feant's picture
HRH Feant (not verified) thesonandheir Feb 6, 2017 5:51 PM

Plenty of rice is grown in the good ol US. Louisiana and California have some of the best rice in the world!

We don't need any stinking Chink rice!

King Tut's picture
King Tut (not verified) HRH Feant Feb 6, 2017 6:04 PM

All of the Commies on ZH enjoy price controls

sinbad2's picture

Yep the US does control the price of rice within the US, what did you expect, a free market, as if.

Bubba Rum Das's picture

"We don't need any stinking Chink rice!"

Yeah, fuck that Star Wars Midget!

Nobodys Home's picture

California Basmati has one of lowest levels of Arsenic (which is pretty high in a lot of rice)....but I'd be checking the radiation level nowadays

Hmmm. Arsenic/radiation...I guess it's a trade off.

sinbad2's picture

The US gives subsidies of $1 billion a year to American growers, and taxes imported rice from 10 to 90% depending on the country of origin.

China doesn't export much rice, less than Australia. India is the big exporter, followed by Thailand and the USA. The US is a big exporter, because production is subsidized in the US.

eatthebanksters's picture

Jack Ma is wrong about Trump.  Trump is not retreating from trade, he is retreating from bad trade deals which unfairly punish US workers. If China would float their currency and run a truly free market, then things might be different...but then China has never gone away from the feudal model and the ruling Politburo are just another from of the hierarchy of the feudal model...centrally controlled and the few have the power and the wealth...fuck em.

Krungle's picture

Sure, and he's also doing the neocon thing of wasting a trillion dollars starting another war front with a country that would actually be happy to trade with us. No reason to fight Iran. Also, you might have missed this, but the US is centrally controlled and very few have the power and the wealth. I'm curious as to how we are functionally different than the Chinese at this point beyond the fact that we're still putting up a fight against that? When a bunch of billionaires can no longer get a federal judge to overturn a Constitutional order we can talk about how we are different. When we have a Politburo that isn't trying to foment rebellion against the lawfully elected government we can talk about how we're different. And when we don't have an artificial propped up petrodollar we can talk about how the Chinese manipulate their currency. 

I sincerely hope our President is successful in negotiating trade deals that benefit the people of this country. But that is all for naught if he goes full in on the neocon bandwagon and continues to piss away the wealth of the nation on imaginary threats. Iran is on the ground fighting ISIS--pick a side, are you going to fight ISIS or Iran? You can't have both.

sinbad2's picture

"If China would float their currency and run a truly free market,"

The US is as bad as China, the US manipulates the value of the dollar, and trying to sell into the US market is very difficult, due to US subsidies to American producers, and bans on all sorts of products. As an example, you can't sell leather for auto upholstery to the US.

Kayman's picture

"to sell into the US market is very difficult,"  WTF ???!!!!

Have you looked at the Trade Deficits over the past 30 years?  

Bullshit meter off the charts. 

sinbad2's picture

A large part of those trade deficits is caused by American companies that manufacture outside the US.

GM has no problems importing its components from Germany China etc, but if VW tried, the US would make them build the factory in America.

SmittyinLA's picture

Forget the currency bullshit, it's a red herring

TheLastTrump's picture

They're all sucking off the US tit. Europe, China, Japan, and especially that fucking Mexico.


How long have we been providing security for most of the world? Time to pay fuckers, or defend yourselves.

sinbad2's picture

But the US doesn't make high tech stuff anymore.

The decision to get out of manufacturing, and into financial services as America's main source of income was made by all American political parties over decades. You could change course, but it would take 20 years to see any benefit.

Kayman's picture

If it takes 2 weeks or 2 decades, let's get started. Let's build all those automated factories here instead of China.

sinbad2's picture

I agree, but the people with the capital, the capitalists, make more profit from factories in China than they do from factories in the US.

In our economic system, profit is more important than anything else, so the US is cactus, unless wages are cut by 80%, or the dollar devalued by a similar amount.

TheLastTrump's picture

Or we impose tariffs on imports that compete unfairly against our goods. Level the playing field. It's going to bring jobs back to the US.


The US has strong tech manufacturing now, it's just lost a lot of jobs that will be coming back.


Chinese wages have risen and manufacturers of many things have moved elsewhere like Bangladesh & Mexico. It is to the point already where manufacturing in America again makes sense. With encouragement from Trump & the dissolution of H1B's we're going to be booming soon.

fuck WaPo BTW https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/us-losing-high-tech-manu...


sinbad2's picture

"Level the playing field."

The US is one of the most protected markets in the world.

The reality is the quality is crap, and the prices high, a level playing field would decimate what is left of American industry.

If America wants to be a major manufacturer again, it has to modernize, you're still making the same stuff you were in the 1960's.

DeathMerchant's picture

Fuck it!! Nationalize everything

aliens is here's picture

I am really sick of little commies telling us what to do.

max_leering's picture

little "globalist" commies... fixed it for ya


and I am sick of it also- 100% against NWO

Kefeer's picture

Not much escapes the Cat and lives to tell about it.  You are correct about Ma - see comment about by your cousin.

Consuelo's picture



Me too.   Let's blow 'em up Sgt Rock...!!!

Nobodys Home's picture

Stand down Private Consuelo. Being a Mexican man with an almost woman's name, you of all soldiers should realize the value of short term inclusion. The suitcase nuke will be here in three days. Until then, carry on as usual.

King Tut's picture
King Tut (not verified) aliens is here Feb 6, 2017 6:07 PM

It's cool if it's a white guy bossing us around though

Robert Trip's picture

It's obvious to anyone with more than 6 brain cells that Ma is a helluva lot smarter than Trump.

Trump should listen to Ma and take him seriously.

If Trump doesn't cotton to Ma then Trump, I'm afraid, is just another fucking Zionist stooge.

Kefeer's picture

Ma is a Communist hack and bad actor for free-markets.  You do not get to be called China's richest man without being raped daily by the Chinese Communist Party.

Nobodys Home's picture

Weird that he is promoting globalism.
So now that China supplies the industry and cheap world goods they've gone from isolationist, communist, protectionists to world embracing globalists.

Woo Flung Poo

Nobodys Home's picture

Weird that he is promoting globalism.
So now that China supplies the industry and cheap world goods they've gone from isolationist, communist, protectionists to world embracing globalists.

Woo Flung Poo

sinbad2's picture

It was the US that isolated China, sanctioned it, and any country who dealt with it. The US refused to admit that China even existed. China according to the US was Taiwan, the Chinese on the mainland didn't even exist in America's eyes, until LBJ bankrupted America, and Nixon had to recognise China to save the American economy.

Kayman's picture


A little bit of sino oil mixed with your history much? During the decades of Mao, China was too busy reading the little red book of fairy tales and killing it's own people, especially intellectuals, producers and farmers. Only when Mao died and stopped raping underage peasant girls, did China do a 180 in their economy to catch up to the rest of the world.

Nixon had already solved the bankruptcy issue by setting the dollar free from gold.  It wasn't until Clinton got paid off by Walmart and the Chinese, did the U.S. start importing shit from China like there was no tomorrow.

TheLastTrump's picture

Yep, the back stabbing of the US middle class by their own countrymen started in the mid 1990's. Jobs to China, cheaply made garbage everything in return.


I remember how quality picked up its decline. I've also seen a RAPID decline in quality lately in many brands. 

DeathMerchant's picture

What ?? A connection between Bill Clinton of Arkansas and the Walton family of Arkansas??? Seriously ?? Who knew ??

TheLastTrump's picture

Fuckerberg is right there helping those ChiComs repress their people. Practice makes perfect.