> I think you're exaggerating the size of the MNC sector in
> China...Remember, China is still a pretty small part of MNC operations."
That's what I'm still trying to determine.
China may still represent a "pretty small part of MNC operations" compared to the activities of the multinationals in Europe and North America, but the situation may be changing more rapidly than you suggest.
For example, a recent study by the US research firm, Global Insight, anticipates that as soon as 2020 China's share of global manufacturing output will pull even with and then begin to overtake the US and Europe on the basis of their respective growth rates. It estimates that China has nearly trebled its share of world production since 1995, from 4.6% to 12.1% at the end of last year, while the US only slightly increased its share of output from 24% to 25.5% and Europe and Japan experienced relative declines. By 2020, China's share is expected to be 22.4%, the US's 22.2% and Europe 19%. See: (http://www.ft.com:80/cms/s/25c8a88e-0958-11dc-a349-000b5df10621,dwp_uuid=9c33700c-4c86-11da-89df-0000779e2340,_i_rssPage=9c33700c-4c86-11da-89df-0000779e2340.html)
Most of this burgeoning production appears to be by foreign firms. Since Deng, we know that the country has been thrown wide open to to foreign investment and I have understood that they were leading China's development, but not at all to the extent suggested in an article from the latest issue of the Australian Marxist publication, Green Left Weekly, posted on Lou Proyect's list last week. Under the headline "China: Foreign capital controls three quarters of industry", Eva Cheng - citing a study from the Beijing Communication University - writes that "foreign capital controls the top five firms in every industry where Beijing allows foreign investment. Additionally, in 21 out of China's 28 leading industrial sectors foreign capital controls most of the assets."
She goes on:
"Based on the Statistics Yearbook of China 2005, the Communication University study revealed the following extent of foreign capital control of Chinese industries in shareholding terms: 82% in agriculture, forestry, cattle and fishery, 67% in mining, 77% in manufacturing, 56% in electricity, fuel gas and water production and supplies, 66% in construction, 76% in transport, warehousing and posts, 92% in telecommunications, calculator and software, 77% in wholesale and retail, 70% in accommodation and restaurant, 66% in finance, 78% in real estate, 81% in leasing and commercial services, 82% in scientific studies, technical services and geological studies, 66% in irrigation, environment and public infrastructure management, 75% in services for residents and other services, 64% in education, 69% in public health, social security and social welfare, 78% in culture, sports and entertainment, and 88% in miscellaneous industries.
"In terms of market share, the study reveals in the following extent of foreign control during the same period: 82% in communications, calculator and related electronics, 72% in instrumentation products, cultural and office machinery, 48% in textile apparel, footwear and hats, 49% in leather, fur, feather and related industries, 51% in furniture, 60% in educational and sports products, 41% in plastics, and 42% in transport equipment." (http://www.greenleft.org.au/2007/710/36857)
If accurate, these statistics suggest a degree of foreign control characteristic of a colonial or semi-colonial dependency - the country's condition before the Chinese Revolution. For some leftists, this underscores the need for a new revolution to restore national sovereignty and economic independence in order for China to free itself of the chains which international capitalism and a new Chinese bourgeoisie, abetted by a degenerated and corrupt CCP government, have reimposed on the country.
To be sure, I think capitalism is being restored in China and it is producing lots of accompanying class conflict in the process, but in terms of the relationship between the Chinese state and foreign capital, I see nothing in China's present confident demeanour and increasingly assertive role in the world economy which remotely resembles it's humilating subservience to Western and Japanese capital which marked the country's history. I think this mood is not restricted to official circles, either; my sense is much of the population - certainly that part of it in the major cities, and especially the young - believe that material conditions are improving and that the future belongs to China, which is hardly the prevailing mass sentiment you find in conditions of colonial oppression.
That's why I think it's difficult to think of "foreign ownership" in China in the same way as it's been viewed in the the past, when it was generally restricted to resource extraction to support manufacturing and exporting at home, and foreign firms relied on the their own governments to protect their interests in the subject territories. Today, technological advances have shifted the manufacturing centre of gravity overseas, capital flows between the developed and developing world are tending to reverse, the weight of the state and social classes have strengthened in the latter relative to the former, the "foreign" firms seem less tied to their countries of origin, and the trend seems to be towards a more interdependent and intertwined capitalist world economy, reducing the possibilities of inter-imperialist conflict. Which is not to rule out the spread of class struggles along international lines if global capitalism should run aground.