Hmm, what's really important in U.S.-China trade?

Is it the $273 billion trade deficit that the U.S. racked up with Beijing last year?

Is it the brutal repression of human rights by the ruling regime in Beijing?

Is it forced technology transfer for U.S. companies looking to sell to the Chinese market?

Or is it ensuring that China can continue with "job-creating investment" in the U.S.?

Where to begin, huh-- so many problems to deal with regarding China.  As former Reagan administration staffer Clyde Prestowits points out, though, in a new Foreign Policy op-ed, it's amazing that America's media elite are worried about China not feeling welcome when investing in the U.S.:

If China is becoming more overtly and harshly repressive and shutting down run-of-the-mill U.S. Embassy activity in Beijing, why do the Times and the Post insist that the Obama administration try to make it easier for U.S. companies to invest there? Wouldn't such investment only prove to the Chinese that Americans don't care about repression even of their own embassy as long as their companies can put a few more factories in China?

Similarly, why do the media mavens want U.S. companies to invest in China when the rising U.S. trade deficit is contributing to rising unemployment? Wouldn't it be better if they invested in America?

Prestowitz is completely correct.  What's needed is realism in U.S.-China trade relations.  Click here to read more.