Nail on the head

Re: "Backing Trump on tariffs, not on tone", (Opinion, April 17). The article by economist Chartchai Parasuk shows a rare practitioner of the dismal science who writes eloquently. However, I do get the impression the good economist risks missing the forest for the trees because he put too much focus solely on the trade balance.

The balance of payments, as the name suggests, must balance. If, as is in America's case, the merchandise trade deficit leads to a current account deficit, this will be offset by a surplus in its capital account.

In other words, countries that have trade surpluses with the US are holding large amounts of its currency, much of which is parked in foreign exchange reserves through the purchase of US government-issued debt, resulting in a capital account surplus for the US.

This willingness to hold the greenback by its trading partners is what gives the US dollar its exorbitant privilege as the world's reserve currency.

Not only does this allow its government to access practically limitless cheap borrowing, it provides a benchmark for its corporations, businesses and home-buyers to access credit at relatively low rates.

This, in turn, has a positive snowball effect on its overall economy, as well as its equity markets, where the risk-free rate being lower gives rise to higher valuations, as laid out in the Capital Asset Pricing Model.

In the latter part of his article, Dr Chartchai wagers that forthcoming US-Thai tariff talks are doomed to fail due to the latter's reluctance to restrict China's re-exports via Thailand.

This is indeed the crux of the entire tariff argument. From the US perspective, China has restricted access to its own markets while at the same time taking advantage of the free world's open trading system to capture global market share by engaging in currency manipulation (as pointed out by Dr Chartchai), as well as industrial-scale subsidies.

The resulting wealth it has generated has been used to finance the largest re-militarisation since WWII. The first Trump administration's trade tariffs on China have led it to re-export through countries considered friendly to the US, such as Mexico, Vietnam and Thailand. In this regard, Dr Parasuk has hit the nail on the head.

Vichai

Unity is a way off

Re: ''Bigger Asean could counter tariffs", (Opinion, April 17).

There is no doubt that Asean enlargement could enhance the bloc's leverage in an increasingly adversarial global trade environment. However, such enlargement is not merely a strategic move, but a political act that requires unanimous agreement among all current members.

Asean's consensus-based decision-making framework means that any new accession depends on tangible solidarity among existing members.

This solidarity must pre-exist any formal declarations; it demands sustained political will to accommodate diverse economic realities and geopolitical concerns.

Whether the candidate is Timor-Leste or Sri Lanka, expansion will only succeed if unity is more than rhetorical.

Ioan Voicu

Strengthen Asean

Re: "Thai PM backs Asean united front on tariffs", (BP, April 17).

As an American, I commend Thailand strengthening trade ties with other Southeast Asian countries. Much of the karma generated by Mr Trump's impulsive, unthoughtful trade edicts are own-goals harming the USA.

The logical next step for Asean is a common currency. It would not be difficult to implement. After that, open borders. Both those policies are happening within the EU and, if instated in Southeast Asia, would strengthen its countries economically.

Having all vehicles driving on the right side of the road would also strengthen the region.

It would preclude switching sides of the road when crossing borders, and vehicle manufacturing would have steering wheels standardised on one side.

Ken Albertsen
18 Apr 2025 18 Apr 2025
20 Apr 2025 20 Apr 2025

SUBMIT YOUR POSTBAG

All letter writers must provide a full name and address. All published correspondence is subject to editing and sharing at our discretion

SEND