U.S. Army Captain Michael Kelvington, commander of the Battle company, 1-508 Parachute Infantry battalion, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, bows next to remains of Gulam Dostager, a member of Afghan Local Police who was killed in the blast of an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) during the joint Tor Janda (Black Flag in Pashtu) operation, in Zahri district of Kandahar province, southern Afghanistan May 25, 2012.  REUTERS/Shamil Zhumatov  (AFGHANISTAN - Tags: MILITARY CIVIL UNREST CONFLICT TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY)

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Members of the U.S. Navy Blue Angels fly over the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan as part of the 25th annual Fleet Week celebration in New York, May 23, 2012.  REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz (UNITED STATES - Tags: MILITARY ANNIVERSARY TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY)

Fleet Week

The U.S. Navy takes Manhattan for a week.  Slideshow 

Photo

The SpaceX mission

A privately owned unmanned rocket blasts off on a mission to be the first commercial flight to the International Space Station.  Slideshow 

U.S. to press China on innovation policy at meeting

Related Topics

WASHINGTON | Mon May 10, 2010 8:12pm EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States is pushing China in the run-up to high-level talks this month in Beijing to roll back controversial technological innovation policies that have raised new concerns about its openness to foreign companies.

The Chinese "understand it needs to be addressed and I think they are considering some of the recommendations that we and others have given them," John Frisbie, president of the U.S.-China Business Council, told Reuters.

But "it's too early to say" whether U.S. discomfort with China's "indigenous innovation" policies can be put to rest when the United States and China meet in two weeks for the annual Strategic and Economic Dialogue, he said.

The issue is driven by China's desire to promote technological innovation and get a bigger share of the world's most valuable trademarks.

U.S. companies say they don't object to that, but are distressed by proposals that erect new barriers to foreign investment and exports in the fast-growing Chinese economy.

Business groups from the United States, Europe and Canada in a joint statement on Monday urged China "not to carry forward" with a plan outlined in November that would give significant government procurement preferences to products containing intellectual property developed and owned in China.

They also called for "an immediate review of all innovation policies to ensure they do not discriminate between foreign and domestic suppliers, and achieve the goal of the opening China's market wider to foreign investment and exports promised by President Hu (Jintao) and Premier Wen (Jiabao)."

Jeremie Waterman, senior director for Greater China at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said businesses were concerned Beijing could be retreating from 30 years of more or less steady progress toward increased openness.

"Are we now at an inflection point where China's looking to really drive forward with more harmful import and intellectual property substitution policies that will no question increase tensions with China's trading partners?" Waterman said.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner already raised the stakes for the May 24-25 talks when he delayed an April 15 decision on whether China was manipulating its currency for an unfair trade advantage.

Many U.S. lawmakers who believe that Beijing deliberately undervalues its currency for an unfair trade advantage are now looking for progress on that issue at the talks.

But U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk, who will also be in Beijing for the meeting, said last week that Beijing's undervalued yuan was just one factor affecting trade with China

"I have as many businesses concerned right now about indigenous innovation as I do about currency," Kirk said.

(Reporting by Doug Palmer; Editing by Eric Walsh)

Comments (0)
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.