Preview Newsletter
Project Dory Monitoring 21 June 2017
-
World Leaders Must Accept The Reality Of A Nuclear North Korea And Work From There
Jul 20, 2017 | Forbes
By William Pesek
Some national leaders surround themselves with “yes-men,” toadies who agree with anything they do. Wiser leaders choose advisors who speak up when needed. And then there’s South Korea’s Moon Jae-in, who wants to be his own “no-man.” -
A closer look at China’s import-processing zones
Jul 21, 2017 | Policy Forum
By Tristan Kenderdine
China is enacting reforms to normalise the importation of goods for domestic consumption. Yet any opening of the Chinese market will be selective and will serve state industrial policy, Tristan Kenderdine writes. -
China Focuses on Avoiding Trade War as Xi-Trump Honeymoon Ends
Jul 20, 2017 | Bloomberg Politics
By Ting Shi and Enda Curran
With the honeymoon period ending between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping, China is focused on making the relationship work to avoid a trade war between the world’s two biggest economies. -
Lack of Progress at U.S.-China Talks Raises Stakes for Trump
Jul 20, 2017 | The Wall Street Journal
By Jacob M. Schlesinger and Ian Talley
High-level economic talks between the U.S. and China ended Wednesday without any concrete agreement or future agenda, leaving the Trump administration’s efforts to recast trade ties with Beijing in limbo. -
The U.S. Can Now Ship Rice to China for the First Time
Jul 20, 2017 | Bloomberg Markets
By Megan Durisin and Alan Bjerga
The U.S. can now ship rice to China for the first time ever, signaling a win for President Donald Trump in his efforts to reshape the trade relationship just after talks between the nations broke down Wednesday. -
Maersk Line: Third-Party Data Not Affected by Petya
Jul 20, 2017 | Maritime Executive
In an update Thursday, Maersk Line gave more information into the causes and effects of the Petya cyberattack, which struck its core business IT systems on June 27. Its damage took Maersk weeks to fully repair.
Port Mentions - There are no relevant clips to report at this time.
City/Province Mentions
Competitor Mentions - There are no relevant clips to report at this time.
US - China Relations
Industry News
-
World Leaders Must Accept The Reality Of A Nuclear North Korea And Work From There
Jul 20, 2017 | Forbes
By William Pesek
Some national leaders surround themselves with “yes-men,” toadies who agree with anything they do. Wiser leaders choose advisors who speak up when needed. And then there’s South Korea’s Moon Jae-in, who wants to be his own “no-man.”
In recent speeches aimed at calming tensions with North Korea, Moon laid out a “four no’s” doctrine: No hostile steps toward Pyongyang, no military dramas, no regime-change ulterior motives and no forced “artificial” reunification. With all these assurances, Moon is trying to get Kim Jong-un to say “yes” to fresh dialogue and cooperation on the peninsula.
But there’s also a fifth “no” Moon needs to keep in mind -- the near-certain answer to whether his gambit, however well-intentioned, will succeed.
Kim's survival depends on his military
Consider, first, what Kim is up to with at least 11 missile tests this year: building deterrence abroad and energizing his base at home. The recent attempted test of an intercontinental ballistic missile was aimed, symbolically at least, at a Donald Trump White House pushing a more confrontational line on Pyongyang. It also targeted the trigger-happy generals peering over his shoulder. Kim needs to looks as strong and antagonistic as his father and granddad, if not more.
The influence of these Cold War relics is arguably greater than that of Trump, Moon or China’s Xi Jinping, traditionally North Korea’s main benefactor. Kim can take out foes, kill his uncle and order, allegedly, the assassination of his half-brother.
But his survival, and that of the dynasty, depends on preserving the loyalty of his generals and admirals. Trump has an “America first” policy. Kim’s manta is “military first,” and the volume is rising.
Moon's olive branch won't work
All this explains why Moon’s olive-branch strategy may be no more workable than Trump’s “we’ll bomb them” bluster. The common thread between both approaches -– Kim scrapping his nuclear weapons –- is a non-starter for a supreme leader whose survival depends on a military-provocation complex that won’t go along. From the military’s point of view, appeasing Moon would be grounds for regime change, Pyongyang-style. And Kim knows it.
“I'd put the chances of anything good coming out of this at close to zero,” says Bradley K. Martin, long-time Kim Dynasty expert and author of the forthcoming novel “Nuclear Blues.” Kim, he adds, “seems to think he's on a roll, headed toward his goal of conquering the South. He'll take any goodies Moon offers, put them in a sack and then swing the sack into Moon's jaw.”
Moon’s outreach is welcome, of course. Ever-tightening sanctions these last 15 years got the global community nowhere (Moon is right to call his two predecessors’ hardline policies a failure). Nor has China proved willing to use its considerable financial leverage to bring Kim to heel. And Trump’s threats may be backfiring.
Kim testing his ICBM on July 4, the day Americans celebrate independence, seemed aimed at trolling the Twitter president. While Trump and Japan’s Shinzo Abe object, the first talks between Seoul and Pyongyang since 2015 can’t hurt.
Accept that North Korea has nuclear weapons
The precondition, though, should be no preconditions. As unpalatable as it sounds, it’s time humankind accepted that Pyongyang has nuclear weapons, that it won’t give them up, and to work from there.
This issue was settled in 2002 when then-U.S. President George W. Bush lumped North Korea in with Iraq and Iran as an “Axis of Evil” and then attacked Baghdad. Pyongyang and Tehran got the message immediately: Only nuclear deterrence can save them from Saddam Hussein’s fate.
In his recent book, "Understanding the North Korean Regime,” Keio University’s Atsuhito Isozaki argues Pyongyang also learned much from Muammar el-Qaddafi’s downfall in Libya. In 2003, he scrapped his nuclear ambitions for in favor of better ties with the international community -– only to be ousted and executed by NATO-backed rebels. In the five years since Kim replaced his father, Isozaki writes, Pyongyang has become “even more of a black box” to keep the world guessing about the level of North Korea’s capabilities.
What to do? There are a couple of levers the global community could pull. First, prod China to get serious about docking Kim’s allowance via secondary sanctions. Trump, Abe, the European Union and others could begin boycotting Chinese companies operating factories in border cities like Dandong, the epicenter of Kim’s ability to flout trade curbs.
Since Trump took office and lobbied Xi to tame Kim, Chinese trade with North Korea actually rose nearly 11%, according to official Chinese customs data. Reversing that flow would really get China Inc.'s attention.
Read more: Can China Meet President Trump's Expectations On North Korea?
Second, Moon and Trump could try a “good cop/bad cop” gambit. Circumspect and unassuming, good-cop Moon would handle the outreach and carrots, cajoling Kim to step into the global economy. Trump, who’s hinted at military action more than once, would carry the stick, warning of red lines and preemptive strikes. This tag-team approach may at least convince Kim to freeze his nuclear arsenal at current levels, which is the best the world can really hope for.
Stop Kim from going any further
The good-cop role is becoming increasingly vital to keep Kim from monetizing his advancements. Just as Pakistan’s Abdul Qadeer Khan sold nuclear secrets to his father, Kim Jong-il, what’s to stop Kim Jong-un from opening a one-stop weapons-of-mass-destruction bazaar? If you think ISIS is scary now, just wait until it takes delivery from Kim Productions.
So, Moon is right to take a crack at resurrecting Korea’s 1998-2008 “Sunshine policy.” Family reunions, humanitarian exchanges, discussing military issues and Moon’s offer to meet Kim “anytime, anywhere” aren’t appeasement. They’re a recognition that the status quo of threaten, sanction, repeat isn't working.
But if Moon or anyone else thinks they’re about to end Kim’s “no-man” ways, they’re dreaming.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurelmoglen/2017/03/30/the-brilliant-billionaires-of-hong-kong/#1ec0bb095157
-
A closer look at China’s import-processing zones
Jul 21, 2017 | Policy Forum
By Tristan Kenderdine
China is enacting reforms to normalise the importation of goods for domestic consumption. Yet any opening of the Chinese market will be selective and will serve state industrial policy, Tristan Kenderdine writes.
China’s 2016 e-commerce 13th Five-Year Plan was a signal to the domestic economy that was largely ignored by international firms. It would, however, cause complications for companies in developed economies that have been profiting from grey market cross-border trade with China.
The business model for such firms was simply to let overseas Chinese buy products off the shelf in Europe, Australia, Japan, Korea and the US and ship the goods back to China using personal networks loosely organised through WeChat. As it becomes a net-importer and consumer of higher value-added goods, China is moving to regulate this trade.
China’s second-wave trade and investment regime is developing a network of ‘free trade zones’ with an explicit plan to attract inward manufactures for domestic consumption. Although they may be ‘free trade zones’ by name, they are more accurately described as ‘import-processing zones’, and they represent an exchange between foreign manufactured goods and access to the world’s largest consumer market, a reversal of the export-processing zones of the 1980s.
China’s import-processing zones are the latest phase of a spatial trade game which started with the unequal ports treaties with the European industrialising powers.
The new free-trade zone plans also clearly intersect with wider domestic reforms for national e-commerce distribution systems, global e-trade institutional infrastructure, and the development of logistics firms capable of coping with the China-scale of cross-border point-to-point package delivery.
January’s foreign trade development 13th Five-Year Plan sought to visualise the transition to an import-driven economy. It plans ‘five optimisations’ for the Chinese economy: international market structure, domestic market structure, commodities structure, building internationally competitive firms, and trade innovation. It is worth noting that ‘trade innovation’ is mostly about drawing global commerce towards an international Chinese investment system, without truly opening China’s consumer or capital markets.
In April, the locations of the third batch of import-processing free trade zone pilots were confirmed: Liaoning, Zhejiang, Henan, Hubei, Chongqing, Sichuan, and Shaanxi. These seven add to the initial pilot at Shanghai and the later addition of Guangdong, Tianjin and Fujian.
Trade giants Hangzhou and Qingdao will be the first cities to enact new regulations on cross-border e-commerce, expected to come into effect on 1 January 2018 with most items treated as duty-free personal goods. Hangzhou’s cross-border e-commerce pilot is set to become the world’s first ‘electronic world trade platform’ experimental zone — this new e-commerce infrastructure will affect every part of the global supply chain.
The open market framing of these zones belies wider state industrial policy. As shown in the chart below, co-located with the zones are 18 ‘Torch’ industrial research and development parks. (see chart).
Combining the locations of the import-processing zones, the industrial research Torch zones, and the government-administered New Areas paints a clear pattern of a state industrial policy. The free trade zones are far from a test-run for an eventual nationwide liberal trade environment — instead, each zone is to intersect with specific state industrial policy goals.
The import-processing zones all have explicit policy goals. For example, Liaoning aims to reform advanced manufacturing SOEs, while Zhejiang’s role will be to establish international maritime logistics bases. Henan is slated to improve land and river logistics channels, with Hubei responsible for upgrading the Yangtze River Delta Economic Zone. Chongqing and Sichuan provide a nexus for integrating inland Belt and Road projects with the coastal Yangtze River Delta Economic Zone. Shaanxi is to explore modern agriculture and expand cooperation with countries along the Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st-century Maritime Silk Road.
China’s Ministry of Commerce recently transmitted a revised version of the Foreign investment industries guidance catalogue to the public, after drafting by the Central Party Leading Group on Deepening Reform. The catalogue relaxes imports on industries in which China already has a technological advantage and where it hopes to attract cheaper inputs.
While ostensibly relaxing requirements for foreign firms and promising domestic and foreign firms equal representation under the Made in China 2025 industrial policy, in reality the government is hoping to push foreign investment away from more developed coastal consumer markets and towards central and western regions through the Advantageous industries for foreign direct investment in central and western regions policy document.
China importing more from the world and becoming a net importer is a good thing. Yet there are serious strings behind these innovations – what may look like an opening of the Chinese market will most certainly serve the state first.
https://www.policyforum.net/closer-look-chinas-import-processing-zones/
-
China Focuses on Avoiding Trade War as Xi-Trump Honeymoon Ends
Jul 20, 2017 | Bloomberg Politics
By Ting Shi and Enda Curran
Washington talks end without joint statement or breakthroughs
Mnuchin hails ‘big’ step toward reducing trade deficit
With the honeymoon period ending between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping, China is focused on making the relationship work to avoid a trade war between the world’s two biggest economies.
High-level economic talks in Washington on Wednesday began with tense exchanges and ended with no joint statements and no major breakthroughs. While Trump’s team claimed victory, China took a more conciliatory tone: The foreign ministry said Thursday that both sides agreed to start “constructive cooperation” to narrow a $309 billion trade deficit.
The post-meeting statements, while hardly positive, pave the way for more dialogue following a volatile period since Trump’s election win in which ties lurched between extremes. Initial fears of a full-blown trade war disappeared after Trump praised Xi during an April summit, only to resurface recently after the U.S. president faulted him for failing to do more on North Korea.
"Like marriage, you wouldn’t go directly for divorce just because you have some bickering," said Ruan Zongze, vice president of the China Institute of International Studies in Beijing and a former top diplomat in Washington. "China-U.S. ties have grown to be deep and strong enough to absorb setbacks, as long as these setbacks don’t turn into drastic ups and downs."
China’s two-way commerce with the U.S. last year amounted to about $600 billion, nearly twice as much as its second-biggest trading partner Japan. The U.S.’s trade deficit with China is more than three times greater than with Mexico, another frequent target of Trump’s ire.‘Big Step’
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said before the meeting that the U.S. would push China to lift foreign ownership restrictions in its financial services industry and to remove hurdles for the technology sector. The brief U.S. statement after the meeting made clear that didn’t happen, with Mnuchin and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross saying China “acknowledged our shared objective to reduce the trade deficit.”
Still, Mnuchin cast the meeting as a success, telling the Financial Times that the administration achieved a “very big step forward” in tackling the deficit. He told the newspaper that Beijing had “heard the direction of the marching orders” Trump had given them.
In Beijing, the foreign ministry said that both sides agreed to narrow the gap and the main result was establishing a "correct direction" for bilateral economic cooperation -- a standard phrase indicating the need to resolve disputes only through dialogue.
Read More: Trump Honeymoon With China Ends as Dialogue Turns Frosty
China’s vague comment acknowledged that the meeting didn’t yield anything concrete, according to He Weiwen, deputy director of the Center for China and Globalization in Beijing.
"Nobody here really expected the first talks to produce much," said He, a former business attache at China’s consulates in New York and San Francisco. "What we’ve got is not some contingent plan. China plays a long game with the U.S., and won’t be discouraged by a small setback like this one."
Early on, Trump linked trade policy with China’s action to stem North Korea. After a few months went by with little action, the administration has indicated it’s weighing tariffs or restrictions on imports of Chinese steel and aluminum, which it says unfairly flood global markets and make U.S. producers unable to compete.
While that stance means China remains vulnerable to U.S. protectionism, the approach "seems to reduce the risk of more significant harm to China’s exports to the U.S.," said Louis Kuijs, head of Asia economics at Oxford Economics in Hong Kong. The former World Bank and International Monetary Fund economist said China sends little steel to the U.S. and both sides ultimately "don’t really want to see an escalation."Tug-of-War
Chinese Vice Premier Wang Yang warned on Wednesday that the two countries were so mutually dependent economically that "confrontation will immediately damage the interests of both." He cited Xi’s remarks at Mar-a-Lago: "There are a thousand reasons to make the China-U.S. relationship work, and no reason to break it."
That contrasted with comments by Ross, who scolded China about trade imbalances and said they need to improve.
"There’s a tug-of-war between the economic nationalists and the more corporate-friendly Trump camps, and it had seemed the former were winning -- Ross’s words suggest so," said Michael Every, head of financial markets research at Rabobank Group in Hong Kong. "However, China is simply not going to budge. It probably figures the U.S. will just back off."
The U.S. had higher hopes immediately after the Trump-Xi meeting, and saw some initial results. The 100-day action plan, which expired Sunday, reopened China’s market to U.S. beef after 14 years.
Read More: China-U.S. Trade Talks Near 100 Days Jarred by North Korean Test
Despite tensions, Trump has maintained praise for Xi of late. While visiting Paris last week, he called his Chinese counterpart a "terrific guy" and "great leader." Those personal bonds may at least help avoid some of the worst-case scenarios.
"There will be bumps on the road as both China and U.S. test each other’s position," said Chua Hak Bin, a senior economist with Maybank Kim Eng Research in Singapore. "Trade negotiations will be more of a dance than a fight. We don’t think the trade talks will degenerate into a broader trade war, as both sides stand to lose big."
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-20/china-focuses-on-avoiding-trade-war-as-xi-trump-honeymoon-ends
-
Lack of Progress at U.S.-China Talks Raises Stakes for Trump
Jul 20, 2017 | The Wall Street Journal
By Jacob M. Schlesinger and Ian Talley
WASHINGTON—High-level economic talks between the U.S. and China ended Wednesday without any concrete agreement or future agenda, leaving the Trump administration’s efforts to recast trade ties with Beijing in limbo.
After a full day of bilateral meetings, the U.S. side issued a terse statement saying that “China acknowledged our shared objective to reduce the trade deficit which both sides will work cooperatively to achieve.”
The statement from Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin didn’t provide further details on just how much the two sides could agree on, or when they would resume talks.
Chinese officials painted a rosier picture of Wednesday’s talks, with Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang describing them as “innovative, practical and constructive,” though he reiterated China’s displeasure at recent U.S. actions, including arms sales to Taiwan. China’s Commerce Ministry didn’t immediately comment on the outcome of the dialogue.
U.S. and Chinese officials agreed that “one of the solutions to address the trade imbalance is for the United States to expand its exports to China, instead of reducing imports from China,” Chinese Vice Finance Minister Zhu Guangyao said in remarks reported by the official Xinhua News Agency. Beijing is also urging Washington to lift export controls that curb sales of high-tech products to China, Mr. Zhu said.
The failure to take specific steps to close America’s $347 billion trade deficit with China—70% of the U.S. global imbalance—raises pressure on the Trump administration to consider shifting from its embrace of cooperation with Beijing toward more confrontation.
Trump aides have been weighing a series of tougher trade policies toward China, from new import barriers on steel and solar panels, to tighter restrictions on investments, but have so far chosen not to implement them.
People familiar with Wednesday’s talks said that American negotiators tried, unsuccessfully, to use the threat of new steel tariffs to force the Chinese to commit to specific benchmarks for cutting the country’s mammoth production overcapacity in that sector, a big factor dragging down steel prices globally.
The meetings were held to mark the end of a 100-day period that President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping had set to come up with a comprehensive plan to reset commercial ties between the world’s two largest economies. The lack of any announced plan means they failed to meet that self-imposed deadline.
The decision to issue a statement from just the U.S. side was a break with past practices after similar negotiations held in recent years during the Obama and Bush administrations. In the past, both countries issued common statements summarizing what they had discussed, emphasizing areas of agreement—and usually issuing a list of sector-specific market-opening pledges from China. It was also a contrast with the more amicable joint statement given by Mr. Trump and Mr. Xi during an April Florida summit where they agreed to launch a “Comprehensive Economic Dialogue.”
“Many expected at the 100-day point we would have much more substantive points of progress,” said Nicholas Lardy, a China scholar at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. He added that the lack of agreement on even modest measures is a sign that U.S.-China relations “are very uncertain and subject to very high risks.”
People familiar with the talks said a major sticking point was a demand from the American negotiators to craft a concrete plan, with benchmarks and a timetable, for reducing China’s trade surplus with the U.S.
“The administration wanted to put some numerical targets in place and I know China was uncomfortable with that,” said Myron Brilliant, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce executive vice president for international affairs.
More than his predecessors, Mr. Trump has focused not just on removing barriers to American exports, but on trying to curb America’s trade deficit, which he has said is a concrete sign of flawed policies. Many economists say Mr. Trump’s focus on trade deficits with individual countries is ill-conceived because deficits are driven in large part by macroeconomic factors beyond the control of trade negotiators, like national saving and investment patterns.
Chinese Vice Premier Wang Yang, who headed his delegation, opened Wednesday’s talks by saying that the economic teams from both countries “have worked around the clock and have held over 60 rounds of working consultations” since the Florida summit to prepare for this week’s session. He portrayed those discussions as more “intense” than intricate negotiations surrounding China’s joining the World Trade Organization in 2001.
People familiar with the discussions said American negotiators had been optimistic going into the meetings that they could announce some kind of accords on Chinese regulation of data at multinational companies—a major complaint of U.S. firms doing business there—easing restrictions on foreign auto makers, curbing Chinese agricultural subsidies, and addressing Chinese steel overcapacity.
The stall in economic talks mirrors a similarly rough patch in the Trump administration’s diplomatic ties with Beijing. In the weeks since the Mar-a-Lago summit, Mr. Trump rebuffed Chinese objections in approving news arms sales to Taiwan, which Beijing considers a renegade province, and sent bombers and naval patrols this month to the South China Sea to assert American freedom to navigate those contested waters. Mr. Trump also tightened economic sanctions against companies and banks allegedly doing businesses aiding North Korea’s nuclear program.
The North Korea issue in particular may affect Mr. Trump’s economic approach to China. The president said earlier that he would give China some leeway on trade in return for Beijing’s help curbing Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions. He has since said he was disappointed with China’s efforts, which may make him feel freer to yield the trade club.
“In terms of North Korea, our strength is trade,” Mr. Trump said last week.
Beijing hadn’t been likely to grant major concessions to Washington even without recent irritants in the relationship, according to Huo Jianguo, a former Chinese trade official turned researcher.
“Large gaps still exist between the U.S. and China in terms of their economic interests, and there’s little consensus on an approach toward bridging those differences,” said Mr. Huo, vice chairman of the China Society for World Trade Organization Studies. “Both sides still need to time to adjust their mentalities.”
The Trump team early on expressed optimism that it had found a new formula for solving nettlesome trade tensions where prior administrations had failed. In May, as part of a quick down payment, the two governments announced agreement on Chinese market-opening measures in agriculture and finance, with a Chinese pledge to deliver concrete results before this week’s meetings.
But some U.S. business groups and affected companies have complained that while China has met the letter of its pledges, it has failed to live up to the spirit of them, removing the promised trade barriers, while leaving other impediments in place.
A new tiff flared up this week when Dow Chemical Co. said China had appeared to renege on a promise to provide an expedited review of its genetically modified soybean crops as part of the May pledge to accelerate approval of eight stalled biotechnology products.
The Chinese government said there had been a misunderstanding and that the Dow product hadn’t been on its priority clearance list.
Some American business leaders worry that the stalled talks could create new uncertainty and instability in bilateral economic ties.
“We are disappointed the Comprehensive Economic Dialogue ended at an apparent impasse,” John Frisbie, president of the US-China Business Council, said. “It is important for governments to take tangible steps to address longstanding issues and ensure the commercial relationship remains a source of stability in the overall relationship.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-opens-difficult-china-trade-talks-1500478896
-
The U.S. Can Now Ship Rice to China for the First Time
Jul 20, 2017 | Bloomberg Markets
By Megan Durisin and Alan Bjerga
Two countries reach agreement on final protocol, USDA says
Deal comes about a month after China opened to U.S. beef
The U.S. can now ship rice to China for the first time ever, signaling a win for President Donald Trump in his efforts to reshape the trade relationship just after talks between the nations broke down Wednesday.
Officials from the nations finalized a protocol to allow for the first-ever American shipments, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said Thursday in a statement. China is the world’s biggest rice consumer, importer and producer.
The rice deal comes just a month after China reopened its market to U.S. beef imports for the first time in more than a decade and is the latest in a flurry of trade negotiations between the nations. China is also approving more biotech products and increasing U.S. natural gas imports.
But if the nations are to make any meaningful dent in the U.S.’s $347 billion trade deficit with China that’s the object of Trump’s ire, they may have to keep negotiating beyond the modest agreements already signed. And there are signs the relationship may be turning a bit sour. High-level economic talks in Washington broke up Wednesday with the superpowers, the world’s two largest economies, unable to produce a joint statement.
Rice trade talks have been taking place between the two countries for more than a decade, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue said in the statement.
China’s appetite for the grain helped push the nation’s imports up tenfold in the past decade to 5 million metric tons in the 2016-17 season, USDA data show. Still, it could be difficult for the U.S. to get a meaningful piece of that market. American shippers will have to compete with those in Vietnam, Thailand and Pakistan. The countries were China’s biggest suppliers in 2016 and are also among the world’s biggest shippers. The U.S. is No. 5.
Rice traded in Chicago was initially little changed after the USDA announcement, before rising as much as 1.6 percent. September futures were up 1.5 percent at $12.04 per 100 pounds as of 12:38 p.m. local time.
Trump’s goal of reducing trade deficits put a “spotlight” on rice, Brian King, the chairman of industry group USA Rice, said in a statement. China is planning to send a team to inspect U.S. mills and facilities certified for shipment, and the group is working with USDA to ensure that happens quickly, said Carl Brothers, chairman of the group’s international trade policy committee.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-20/five-things-you-need-to-know-to-start-your-day-j5czrkpl
-
Maersk Line: Third-Party Data Not Affected by Petya
Jul 20, 2017 | Maritime Executive
In an update Thursday, Maersk Line gave more information into the causes and effects of the Petya cyberattack, which struck its core business IT systems on June 27. Its damage took Maersk weeks to fully repair.
Maersk Line reported that its operations and communications were significantly affected by the attack, but "no data breach or data loss to third-parties is known to have occurred as of this date." Customer systems connected to Maersk's IT were not affected and were not at risk, as confirmed by Maersk's internal staff and by external cyber experts, who report that Petya is not able to spread between networks.
In the wake of the attack, many external observers wondered whether Maersk Line's servers were properly patched and updated. Petya used an exploit similar to the "WannaCry" malware to move between computers running older, un-patched versions of Windows. Maersk Line said that patches and antivirus software were not an effective form of protection against Petya, and that it has added new defenses.
The carrier said that intends to conduct an internal review after its systems are back up to normal, and will share lessons from the attack with its customers and partners.
Progress towards full recovery
On Monday, Maersk Line brought its ETA change notifications service back online, one of its last customer-facing electronic features to return to normal. In addition, its mobile tracking application for Android devices is back up, and it expects the app for iOS to be back in service at the end of this week.
https://maritime-executive.com/article/maersk-line-third-party-data-not-affected-by-petya
Port Mentions - There are no relevant clips to report at this time.
City/Province Mentions
Competitor Mentions - There are no relevant clips to report at this time.
US - China Relations
Industry News
Add recipients
Suggested