Peter Navarro

AND I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ADMINISTRATION’S BROAD POLICIES, INDUSTRIAL POLICIES, TOWARD CHINA — I MEAN, HOW DOES PETER NAVARRO VIEW CHINA?

PETER NAVARRO: UM, I SEE CHINA AS AN ECONOMIC THREAT TO THE WELFARE OF WORKING MEN AND WOMEN IN THIS COUNTRY PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO WORK WITH THEIR HANDS IN MANUFACTURING, AND YOU KNOW, BACK IN THE DAY IN 2006 WHEN I WROTE THE COMING CHINA WARS, I WAS A VOICE IN THE WILDERNESS. BUT IT’S CONVENTIONAL WISDOM NOW.

AND WHAT EMERGES IS A PICTURE OF ESSENTIALLY AN AUTHORITARIAN STATE FIRST OF ALL, NOT A DEMOCRACY MORE IMPORTANTLY FROM AN ECONOMIC VIEW A NONMARKET ECONOMY THAT USES ALL MANNER OF UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES SUBSIDIES BASICALLY TO ENGAGE IN WHAT HAS EMERGED I THINK ACCURATELY  AS A DESCRIPTION OF PREDATORY BEHAVIOR
AND WE NOW HAVE A PRESIDENT IN DONALD J. TRUMP WHO IS WILLING TO STAND  UP AND DEFEND AMERICA FROM THOSE KIND OF PRACTICES. 

IT’S PURELY A DEFENSE, IT’S NOT AN OFFENSE, IT’S DEFENSE AGAINST THAT PREDATION.

MARGARET HOOVER:  YOU HELPED REALLY ARTICULATE YOUR VIEW OF CHINA IN A MOVIE YOU DIRECTED A MOVIE CALLED DEATH BY CHINA.  

IT WAS NARRATED BY MARTIN SHEEN, AND IT REALLY ARTICULATES AN ECONOMIC VIEW OF CHINA’S ASCENDANCE  AND I WANT TO SHOW A CLIP OF IT.

CLIP PLAYS 

MARGARET HOOVER:  ALL RIGHT.
THAT CHINESE KNIFE STABBING THROUGH THE HEART OF THE AMERICAN MAP AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY IS A REALLY OMINOUS VIEW OF CHINA’S ROLE ON THE WORLD STAGE
PETER NAVARRO: YEt MARTIN SHEEN, AS HE NARRATES, MAKES IT ALSO CLEAR THAT THE PROBLEM REALLY ISN’T 

THE HARD WORKING PEOPLE OF CHINA, THE 1.4 BILLION PEOPLE OF CHINA, IT’S THE COMMUNIST CHINESE PARTY GOVERNMENT THAT BASICALLY ENGAGES IN THESE PREDATORY PRACTICES IN THE INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENT. AND SO YOU HAVE, THERE’S THESE SIX STRATEGIES 

OF ECONOMIC AGGRESSION.THEY PROTECT THEIR MARKETS, THEY ATTACK GLOBAL MARKETS, THEY GO OUT AND TRY TO SECURE ALL THE RESOURCES ALL AROUND THE WORLD, WHETHER IT’S COBALT IN THE CONGO OR COPPER IN CHILE, THEY DOMINATE TRADITIONAL 

MANUFACTURING BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY AND THE LAST TWO, THEY HAVE TO DO WITH THE FUTURE, WHICH IS TO ACQUIRE OUR TECHNOLOGIES AND OUR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND USE THAT BASICALLY TO CAPTURE THE EMERGING INDUSTRIES OF THE FUTURE. THINGS LIKE

 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND ROBOTICS.

MARGARET HOOVER:  THE VIEW YOU ESPOUSE IS A VIEW OF CHINA’S ESCALATION ECONOMICALLY AND HOW IT HAS IMPACTED AMERICAN MANUFACTURING AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY. I MEAN THAT’S THE ROBUST ARGUMENT OF THE FILM AS I UNDERSTAND IT.

PETER NAVARRO: FIRST AND FOREMOST, THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY WANTS TO PRESERVE ITSELF. THAT’S LIKE NUMBER ONE.
MARGARET HOOVER:  RIGHT.
PETER NAVARRO: UM, NUMBER TWO, IT’S CLEAR THAT CHINA WANTS TO DOMINATE THE SOUTH CHINA SEA, THE EAST CHINA SEA, AND ALL THE COUNTRIES OF ASIA ECONOMICALLY.
MARGARET HOOVER:  AND DO YOU THINK IT’S LIMITED TO ECONOMIC HEGEMONY OR DO YOU THINK THERE’S MILITARY HEGEMONY THAT THEY ALSO SEEK?
PETER NAVARRO: WELL CERTAINLY THEY ARE BUILDING SHIPS AND PLANES 

AND MISSILES AND THE LIKE, A LOT FASTER THAN ANYBODY IN THE WORLD, 

AND REGRETTABLY A LOT OF THAT IS FINANCED BY THE AMERICAN CONSUMER AT WALMART.
I THINK WHAT’S IMPORTANT HERE IS THAT  FROM — FROM THE AMERICAN POINT OF VIEW.
MARGARET HOOVER:  UH-HUH.
PETER NAVARRO: — ALL WE SEEK IS PEACE AND PROSPERITY.
AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE HAVE TO DEFEND OUR MARKETS AND OUR ECONOMY 

AGAINST THE KIND OF UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES THAT MANY COUNTRIES ENGAGE IN —

MARGARET HOOVER:  RIGHT
PETER NAVARRO: CHINA OF COURSE BEING THE OUTLIER, BECAUSE WHAT IS DIFFERENT BETWEEN CHINA AND SAY JAPAN AND EUROPE IS THAT IT’S A NONMARKET ECONOMY.
IT’S A STATE-DIRECTED ECONOMY.

MARGARET HOOVER: PRIMARY CONCERN IT SEEMS TO ME HAS BEEN 

IN THE LAST 15 YEARS A CONCERN ABOUT THE HOLLOWING OUT OF THE AMERICAN ECONOMY TO CHINA, SPECIFICALLY THE MANUFACTURING BASE.

AND I JUST WONDER TO WHAT EXTENT THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARGUMENT BUTTRESSES WHAT ARE SORT OF ECONOMICALLY, PROTECTIONIST POLICIES

PETER NAVARRO: I LOVE THAT YOU FRAME 

IT THAT WAY BECAUSE ONE OF THE KEY PRINCIPLES OF THIS ADMINISTRATION AND PRESIDENT TRUMP IS ECONOMIC SECURITY IS NATIONAL SECURITY.
UNLESS YOU HAVE A STRONG MANUFACTURING AND DEFENSE STILL BASE, YOU CAN’T HAVE THE ECONOMIC PROSPERITY YOU NEED AND YOU CAN’T HAVE THE NATIONAL DEFENSE 

THAT YOU DEMAND. 

MARGARET HOOVER:  DOES THAT MEAN RETURNING MANUFACTURING JOBS TO THE UNITED STATES AND HAVING A STRONG NATIONAL DEFENSE
PETER NAVARRO: THAT ABSOLUTELY MEANS. AND JUST –ECONOMIC SECURITY IS NATIONAL SECURITY. STRENGTH IN THE MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL BASED. ALL THE POLICIES — THINK ABOUT THIS. ALL THE POLICIES THE PRESIDENT IS DOING SYNERGISTICALLY WORK TO THAT GOAL.
WHEN YOU PUT ON STEEL AND ALUMINUM TARIFFS, THINK ABOUT THIS, WHAT HAS THAT DONE? THAT  HAS BROUGHT IN A FLOOD OF NEW INVESTMENT, BOTH FROM HOME GROWN

 INVESTMENT AS WELL AS 

FOREIGN INVESTMENT IN THE STEEL AND ALUMINUM SECTORS. WHAT DOES THAT DO? THAT INCREASES PRODUCTIVITY AND THEREFORE WAGES 

GO UP.
MARGARET HOOVER:  WHAT DATA

DO YOU HAVE ON THE STEEL AND ALUMINUM TARIFFS ALREADY? BECAUSE WE HAVE THE BASIS FOR THE STEEL AND ALUMINUM TARIFFS IN 2002 AND 2003, AND I’VE HEARD YOU SAY THERE’S CONFLICTING DATA ABOUT IT. BUT THERE DOES SEEM TO BE OVERWHELMING DATA THAT THEY WERE INEFFECTIVE IN TERMS OF CREATING JOBS.
PETER NAVARRO:  BACK IN THE BUSH YEARS?
YEAH, THAT DIDN’T WORK. I’M NOT SURE WHY IT DIDN’T.
HE LEFT THEM TOO SOON,

 IT MIGHT’VE WORKED.
MARGARET HOOVER:  WELL IT WASN’T WORKING WHICH IS WHY HE TOOK THEM AWAY BECAUSE WE LOST 200,000 JOBS.
PETER NAVARRO:  LEMME TELL YOU WHAT’S HAPPENED HERE OK? THE DAY THOSE STEEL AND ALUMINUM TARIFFS WERE ANNOUNCED WE HAD THE CEOS FROM U.S. STEEL AND CENTURY ALUMINUM ANNOUNCING EXPANSIONS OF CAPACITY. CENTURY ALUMINUM WAS A $150 MILLION DOLLAR EXPANSION.
WE’VE HAD A STEADY INCREASE IN INVESTMENT.
WE’RE GETTING OUR STEEL AND ALUMINUM INDUSTRIES BACK, 

WORKERS ARE COMING IN.  AND IT’S A BEAUTIFUL THING.
AND WE NEED THOSE INDUSTRIES.

MARGARET HOOVER:  IT SOUNDS

 LIKE A NATIONAL SECURITY ARGUMENT FOR PROTECTIONISM.  AND I’LL JUST TELL YOU DEFENSE SECRETARY MATTIS SAYS THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW BEFORE ANY OF THOSE SMELTERS STARTED BACK, BEFORE ANY OF THE COUNTRIES STARTED BACK IN THE STEEL OR ALUMINUM INDUSTRY 30 TIMES MORE CAPACITY THAN WAS REQUIRED FOR OUR 

NATIONAL DEFENSE.
PETER NAVARRO:  SO THAT’S — THAT’S AN ASTUTE POINT.
BUT HERE IS WHAT I THINK IS THE BEST ANSWER. THERE’S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NEEDS FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE, WHICH ARE NARROW AND NATIONAL SECURITY, WHICH ARE BROAD. WE NEED TO HAVE IT DOMESTICALLY FOR OUR INFRASTRUCTURE PURPOSES.
MARGARET HOOVER:  WE CAN GET IT

 FROM OUR  ALLIES.

PETER NAVARRO:   WELL, I’LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE.  WHEN IT WAS THE FIRST GULF WAR. WE HAD A NUMBER OF OUR “FRIENDS” REFUSE TO PROVIDE US SHIPPING AT A TIME THAT WE NEEDED IT, WHICH STALLED OUR OPERATIONS FOR A LONG TIME.
I THINK THE IDEA IS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE THIS STUFF
DOMESTICALLY.
MARGARET HOOVER: LET’S GET BACK TO CHINA. 
HERE IS 

WHAT I’D LIKE YOU TO EXPLAIN TO US, IS HOW TARIFFS ARE GOING TO CONTAIN AN ASCENDANT CHINA ECONOMICALLY?
PETER NAVARRO:  IT’S A FALSE PREMISE.
WE’RE NOT TRYING TO CONTAIN CHINA.
MARGARET HOOVER:  WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO DO?
PETER NAVARRO: WE’RE TRYING TO DEFEND THE
AMERICAN ECONOMY FROM ECONOMIC PREDATION AND AGGRESSION. BECAUSE WHEN WE, WHEN WE SHIP OFF HALF A TRILLION  DOLLARS A YEAR IN THE FORM OF A TRADE DEFICIT, RIGHT, THAT MONEY DOESN’T STAY 

OVER THERE. IT COMES BACK AND BUYS UP OUR ASSETS.
IT’S LIKE THIS GIANT REVERSE MORTGAGE IN THE SKY.
THAT’S GOT TO STOP
MARGARET HOOVER:  YOU KNOW THIS BECAUSE YOU’RE A PHD ECONOMIST, THAT YOU AMONGST YOUR PEERS ARE AN OUTLIER IN THIS VIEW ABOUT TRADE DEFICITS MATTERING, AND THAT MOST ECONOMISTS WILL SAY THAT AS LONG AS THE UNITED STATES CURRENCY REMAINS THE GLOBAL RESERVE CURRENCY, TRADE DEFICITS DON’T MATTER FOR THE UNITED STATES.

PETER NAVARRO: TRADE DEFICITS THAT ARE CHRONIC AND PERSISTENT LIKE THE UNITED STATES HAVE, ARE EXTREMELY HARMFUL. BECAUSE THEY BASICALLY TRANSFER WEALTH ABROAD, THEY BASICALLY TRANSFER FACTORIES ABROAD. TRANSFER JOBS.
MARGARET HOOVER:  INCREASE —
PETER NAVARRO: AND THEY DEPRESS WAGES.
MARGARET HOOVER:  BUT THEY ALSO INCREASE CONSUMER POWER, CONSUMER POWER OF AMERICANS, AND OUR ECONOMY IS 3.8% UNEMPLOYMENT RIGHT NOW. SO IF TRADE DEFICITS ARE SO BAD, WHY IS OUR ECONOMY SO STRONG?

PETER NAVARRO:
IT’S LIKE IF YOU LOOK AT WHEN CHINA JOINED THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION IN 2001, WE WENT ON A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE OUR GROWTH FELL FROM AN AVERAGE OF 3 AND A HALF PERCENT A YEAR IN THE PRECEDING 

FIVE AND A HALF DECADES TO 2%.
A LOSS OF 1.5% GDP A YEAR. WHICH IS TANTAMOUNT TO MILLIONS OF JOBS AND TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF REVENUE, OKAY? WHAT WAS THE DIFFERENCE?
IT WAS LIKE EXPLOSION OF THE

 DEFICIT, THESE UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES. NOW PRESIDENT TRUMP USING TAX CUTS, DEREGULATION, UNLEASHING THE ENERGY SECTOR AND BRINGING ABOUT THESE TRADE DEALS. HAS BOOSTED THAT GROWTH RATE UP NOW ABOVE 3%, WE’RE STRONG AND HEALTHY AND MOVING.  BUT IN ORDER 

TO CONTINUE THAT WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO RESTRUCTURE OUR ECONOMY,BALANCE OUR TRADE DEFICIT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A STRONG MANUFACTURING AND DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE.

MARGARET HOOVER:  I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THOUGH THAT IN THE TIME SINCE CHINA JOINED THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION — THE AMERICAN ECONOMY HAS GROWN, AND WE’VE ALSO IN THAT TIME WEATHERED A GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS. 

SO EVEN THOUGH WE’VE LOST JOBS IN SPECIFIC SECTORS, CERTAINLY IN MANUFACTURING, THAT’S DUE TO, MANY ECONOMISTS WOULD SAY, MANY MORE FACTORS THAN SIMPLY CHINA TAKING OUR MANUFACTURING BASE.

PETER NAVARRO: SO THERE’S NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WORK WITH THEIR HANDS WHO WANT TO RELIVE 2002 

TO 2016, OKAY?
THOSE WERE NOT GOOD TIMES 

PARTICULARLY IN MANUFACTURING COMMUNITIES.

MARGARET HOOVER: UM WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME YOU VISITED CHINA?

PETER NAVARRO: UM JUST BEFORE THE COMING CHINA WARS WAS PUBLISHED.

MARGARET HOOVER: 2004.

PETER NAVARRO: YEAH, AROUND THAT TIME.
AND UH I WANTED TO GO THERE BEFORE THE BOOK CAME OUT. 

MARGARET HOOVER: WHATS THE ENDGAME WITH THE CHINESE TARIFFS? BECAUSE IF PRESIDENT TRUMP KEEPS HIS PROMISES, THE CHINESE HAVE TO SAVE FACE, THEY CAN’T BACK DOWN EITHER. HOW DO YOU SEE THIS RESOLVING ITSELF?

PETER NAVARRO: WELL FIRST OF ALL I’M KEENLY ATTENTIVE TO THIS ISSUE OF FACE, I WAS IN THE PEACE CORPS IN SOUTHEAST ASIA FOR THREE YEARS.

MARGARET HOOVER:  IS THERE A DOWNSIDE TO TARIFFS?

PETER NAVARRO: UH, TARIFFS, 

WHEN THEY’RE USED —

MARGARET HOOVER:  I MEAN THESE CHINESE TARIFFS. IS THERE A DOWNSIDE TO — IN THE U.S?

PETER NAVARRO: I, I, NO, NO.

MARGARET HOOVER:  BUT — BUT WHAT’S BEEN SO SURPRISING TO MANY WHO’S WATCHED THE CHINESE RETALIATIONS IS HOW TARGETED, HOW SOPHISTICATED THEY HAVE BEEN AT TARGETING PARTS OF THE COUNTRY THAT SUPPORTED DONALD TRUMP POLITICALLY, PARTS OF THE COUNTRY THAT SUPPORT REPUBLICAN  LEADERSHIP POLITICALLY AND THAT 

UM THIS IS AN INDICATOR FOR SOMEONE WHO’S STUDIED CHINA —

PETER NAVARRO: YOU COULD CALL THAT ELECTION MEDDLING.

MARGARET HOOVER:  YEAH. DO YOU THINK THE CHINESE ARE MEDDLING IN OUR ELECTIONS?

PETER NAVARRO: WELL, I THINK — WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT — YOU — YOU JUST SAID THEY WERE. YOU BASICALLY  SAID —

MARGARET HOOVER:  NO, YOU SAID YOU CALL IT ELECTION MEDDLING, I DIDN’T.

PETER NAVARRO: WHAT YOU SAID WAS THEY WERE TARGETING OUR DISTRICTS POLITICALLY, RIGHT, SO WHAT IS THAT?

MARGARET HOOVER:  THAT’S BEEN WIDELY REPORTED.
I MEAN, THEY ARE GOING AFTER —

PETER NAVARRO: HERE’S WHAT ALL WE’RE TRYING TO DO IS DEFEND OURSELVES. EVERYBODY IN AMERICA KNOWS THAT CHINA STEALS FROM US, AND THEY CHEAT US. AND SO

 IF IF — WHEN OUR PRESIDENT ACTS TO DEFEND OUR PEOPLE FROM THAT AND THE CHINESE RESPOND BY TRYING TO BULLY OUR FARMERS OR SOMEBODY WHO MAKES BOURBON IN KENTUCKY, UM, 

WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?
IT TELLS YOU THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE BULLIES, AND THAT WE NEED TO STAND UP TO THEM. 

 
MARGARET HOOVER:  IT ALSO TELLS ME THAT THEY MAY NOT BACK DOWN. AND THAT’S WHY I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE END GAME IS. 

AND IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE YOU’RE NOT CLEAR ON WHAT THE END GAME IS EITHER.

PETER NAVARRO: OH, I’M CLEAR WHAT THE END GAME IS.
THE END GAME IS — IS DEFEND OUR COUNTRY FROM ALL UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES.

MARGARET HOOVER:  UH FIRING LINE HAS A TRADITION, AS YOU KNOW, 

PETER NAVARRO:  HA HA HA

MARGARET HOOVER: OF BEING THE PLACE ON TELEVISION THAT WAS HOSTED BY WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY —

PETER NAVARRO: USED TO WATCH IT AS A KID.

MARGARET HOOVER: BACK WHEN YOU WERE A KID, WHEN YOU WERE A FREE MARKET ECONOMIST, WHEN YOU WERE FAR MORE FREE TRADE AND ALIGNED I THINK WITH THE IDEAS OF OF THAT

 PILLAR OF THE MODERN AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT THAT REALLY REVOLVED  AROUND FREE MARKET LIBERTARIANISM, AND SO I WANT TO 

 SHOW YOU AN ORIGINAL FIRING LINE CLIP AND GET YOUR RESPONSE TO IT [ CLIP ROLLING ]

BUCKLEY: Mr. Wallich, how do you analyse that position?

WALLICK: Well, uh, look what would be the consequences of putting these ceilings or quotas on imports. Many areas today 

imported things are precisely what helps the cost of living bearable. Look what’s happened to the price of shoes,

 price

of clothing, price of meat. You put quotas on all of these things, that’s your limit imports and up

go prices. So, the poor man no longer goes near the meat counter, he eats potatoes. He can’t have access to cheap shirts, he pays more for shoes, and so across the board. In the middle of a great inflation to limit imports is very hard on a large number of people, particularly poor people, it helps a small number of people who happen to

face a tough competitive struggle in particular industries. 

BUCKLEY: And you would rather help them in different ways?

WALLICH: I’d much rather help the in constructive ways; because if you keep these industries subsidized, you take

the heat off them to really do their homework and increase their productivity. 

MARGARET HOOVER:  THIS IS THE ARGUMENT FOR OPEN MARKETS. THIS IS THE ARGUMENT THAT IT RAISES THE STANDARD OF LIVING FOR ALL OF OUR PEOPLE; THAT WHILE THERE ARE CERTAINLY SPECIFIC AND HIGHLY TARGETED DETRIMENTS TO SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES, EVEN TAKE MANUFACTURING.  MANUFACTURING NOW IS A BIGGER AND MORE ROBUST INDUSTRY IN THIS COUNTRY THAN IT WAS IN 1969 WHEN THAT CLIP AIRED. IT’S JUST THAT IT LOOKS DIFFERENT.

PETER NAVARRO: SO UM

ABOUT A WEEK AGO I WAS ON A TV SHOW AND SOMEBODY SAID WELL YOU — YOU USED TO BE A FREE TRADER.
WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU? AND IT WAS LIKE,

 WELL, WHEN WAS THAT? IT’S LIKE I WROTE A BOOK IN 1984.
AND THE GUY SAYS WELL, WHAT’S CHANGED?
WELL, FOR EXAMPLE, NAFTA CAME ALONG IN 1994.
CHINA ENTERED THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION IN 2001.
AND WE USHERED IN UH THIS ERA OF GLOBALISM, 

THE HALLMARK OF WHICH IS MASSIVE UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES THAT BASICALLY DRAIN THE LIFEBLOOD OUT OF THE U.S. ECONOMY. SO THAT’S 

QUAINT. THAT’S NICE. IT’S LIKE THE STANDARD KIND OF TEXTBOOK PRE– PRE UH NAFTA PRE-CHINA THING.  

MARGARET HOOVER:  BUT THE STANDARD OF LIVING — THE AMERICAN STANDARD OF LIVING — HAS INCREASED SINCE THEN.
AMERICANS HAVE MORE CONSUMER POWER, AMERICANS LIVE AT A HIGHER LEVEL — AND THE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY IS MORE ROBUST THAN IT USED TO BE

PETER NAVARRO: WELL I WOULD, I WOULD —  —

MARGARET HOOVER:  WE JUST HAVE FEWER JOBS IN MANUFACTURING HERE.

PETER NAVARRO: I DON’T KNOW WHERE TO START ON THAT.
BUT, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU TAKE THE AUTO INDUSTRY, EMPLOYMENT IS DRAMATICALLY DOWN ON THAT,

 AND THE DEGREE OF FOREIGN CONTENT IN THE CARS WE ACTUALLY ASSEMBLE HERE IS HIGH. WE USED TO BE A VERTICALLY INTEGRATED AUTO INDUSTRY, WHERE WHAT WE MADE WE ASSEMBLED HERE. NOW THAT’S NOT THE CASE AT ALL.

MARGARET HOOVER:  BUT THAT SOUNDS LIKE A NOSTALGIC VIEW OF — OF A MANUFACTURING ECONOMY WHEN
WE HAVE AUTOMATION.

PETER NAVARRO: S —

MARGARET HOOVER: WE HAVE MORE PRODUCTIVITY FOR OUR WORKER.

PETER NAVARRO: I’M ALL — I’M ALL FOR AUTOMATION. BECAUSE
WITH AUTOMATION YOU GET HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY AND HIGHER WAGES. WE — WE NEED TO ADVANCE WITH THE TIMES.
BUT WHAT WE DON’T NEED TO DO

 IS ALLOW UH C-C-COUNTRIES LIKE CHINA, SAY, TO DUMP MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF PRODUCT INTO OUR COUNTRY, PUT OUR WORKERS OUT OF BUSINESS, AND UM HAVE — HAVE OUR FACTORIES IN OHIO BASICALLY SHIP OFF THEIR MACHINERY TO SHANGHAI WHERE THE CHINESE MAKE WHAT WE USED TO. SO UM —

MARGARET HOOVER:  YOU DON’T THINK THERE’S A WAY TO RETOOL OUR ECONOMY TO MEET THE CHANGING —

PETER NAVARRO: WELL WE HAVE TO DO THAT.
THERE’S — THERE’S NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT. AND — AND THIS ADMINISTRATION UM IS STRONGLY 

COMMITTED TO THAT. AND WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO DO IS FOCUS ON ON GETTING 

OUR YOUNG GENERATION UH EQUIPPED, BASICALLY FOR THE INDUSTRIES OF THE FUTURE. THINGS WILL MOVE FASTER.
BUT THAT’S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT ISSUE. I THINK THE PEOPLE IN THE FACTORY TOWNS OF OHIO OR PENNSYLVANIA OR WISCONSIN OR MICHIGAN, THEY KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM.
 

MARGARET HOOVER: YOU MENTIONED AUTOMOBILES, AND WE’VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT TARIFFS. THERE’S A THING CALLED THE CHICKEN TAX.

PETER NAVARRO:  OOH.

MARGARET HOOVER:  I KNOW YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
UM THE CHICKEN TAX A IS A TAX ON LIGHT TRUCKS.

PETER NAVARRO: YEAH ONE OF THE FEW REALLY STRONG SECTORS IN OUR ECONOMY IS LIGHT TRUCKS.  AND THAT’S BECAUSE WE HAVE A 25% TARIFF ON THAT

MARGARET HOOVER:IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT — 

PETER NAVARRO: WHO IS GOING TO REVIEW THAT?

MARGARET HOOVER: NO — NO, WELL, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE COMMERCE DEPARTMENT IS LOOKING AT IT. I MEAN IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT —

PETER NAVARRO: THEY’RE NOT LOOKING AT THE CHICKEN TAX.

MARGARET HOOVER:  THEY ARE NOT LOOKING — THEY ARE NOT LOOKING AT THE CHICKEN TAX, BUT IS THERE A PROBLEM THAT — 

PETER NAVARRO: THE CHICKEN TAX  IS SACROSANCT, OKAY?

MARGARET HOOVER:  BUT IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT IT COULD BE EXTENDED TO ALL AUTOMOBILES?

PETER NAVARRO:
THE PRESIDENT HAS UH — HAS RAISED REPEATEDLY THE PROSPECT OF IMPOSING UH SOME LEVEL OF TARIFFS 

ON IMPORTED AUTOS IF HE CAN’T GET FAIRNESS FROM OUR ALLIES.

MARGARET HOOVER:  YEAH, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU ARE SAYING, YEAH, THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE WE COULD IMPOSE —

PETER NAVARRO: WELL, THE PRESIDENT — THE PRESIDENT —

MARGARET HOOVER: AUTOMOBILES — 

PETER NAVARRO: IS LOOKING INTO THIS. AND,
BUT AGAIN IT’S LIKE, IT’S — HE ONLY TAKES THESE ACTIONS IF OUR PARTNERS ARE UNWILLING TO STOP 

TREATING US SO POORLY.

MARGARET HOOVER:  DO YOU THINK THE TARIFFS ARE WORKING?

PETER NAVARRO: UH, I THINK THAT THE TARIFFS UH WILL BE HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL ON CHINA UH IN TERMS OF — OF — OF SLOWING DOWN 

THE — THE THEFT OF OUR TECHNOLOGY AND ATTACKS ON OUR INDUSTRIES, COUPLED WITH UH THE — THE — THE NEW UH REFORMS ON INVESTMENT PRACTICES BY FOREIGNERS TAKING TECHNOLOGY, IT’S CALLED FIRMA, THE CONGRESS

 JUST PASSED THAT. AND IT’S GOING TO BE A — A LONG PROCESS NOT JUST UH WITH CHINA, BUT ALL THESE OTHER COUNTRIES.

MARGARET HOOVER:  YOU CAME INTO THE ADMINISTRATION AND YOU SAID YOU HAD A COUPLE OF GOALS.
ONE, UH RENEGOTIATE NAFTA, GET RID OF NAFTA; TWO, UH ENCOUNTER

 THIS ASCENDANT CHINA, UH AND AND THREE WAS GET RID OF  TPP — 

PETER NAVORRO: WELL, ACTUALLY —

MARGARET HOOVER:  HERE IS WHAT I WANT TO ASK.
YOU HAVE BEEN QUITE SUCCESSFUL, THE ADMINISTRATION HAS, IN RENEGOTIATING, I MEAN YOU HAVE THE USMCA WHICH IS A FEATHER IN THE CAP. YOU HAVE A RENEGOTIATED KOREA DEAL, WHY NOT RENEGOTIATE TPP IN A WAY THAT WORKS WITH ALL OF OUR ECONOMIC ALLIES IN THE REGION?
BECAUSE, IF YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT CHINA AS YOU DO, MOST PEOPLE WHO KNOW CHINA THINK THAT IF THERE WERE A REGIONAL,

 ECONOMIC ALLIANCE THAT DIDN’T INCLUDE THEM, THEY WOULD DO EVERYTHING THEY COULD TO JOIN IT AND THAT YOU COULD USE THAT LEVERAGE IN ORDER TO EXACT CERTAIN OUTCOMES

PETER NAVARRO: SURE.

MARGARET HOOVER:  ISN’T THERE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION 

TO MAKE TPP BETTER?

PETER NAVARRO: WE ARE EFFECTIVELY RE-NEGOTIATING  TPP UM WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF BILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS, 

MARGARET HOOVER:  ARE YOU WORKING ON A BILATERAL WITH JAPAN?

PETER NAVARRO: YES, THAT’S ALREADY BEEN ANNOUNCED.

MARGARET HOOVER: YEAH.

PETER NAVARRO: THIS IS — I MEAN, THIS IS LIKE, PEOPLE’S HEADS ARE SPINNING BECAUSE YOU KNOW, INITIALLY FOR THE FIRST YEAR OR SO, EVERYBODY, INCLUDING PEOPLE ON CAPITOL HILL WERE CRITICIZING THE PRESIDENT FOR BEING RECKLESS ABOUT TRADE AND TALKING TOO TOUGH. AND THIS AND THEN GOING TO UPSET THE APPLE CARTS. AND THEY NOW ALL UNDERSTAND, 

UNLESS THEY HAVEN’T BEEN PAYING ATTENTION THAT, WITH THE PRESIDENT’S FIRM COMMITMENTS IN PRINCIPLES TO FAIR, FREE AND RECIPROCAL TRADE DO IS THEY BRING PEOPLE TO THE NEGOTIATING TABLE, AND THEY GET DEALS DONE.

MARGARET HOOVER:  THE G20 IS MEETING IS IN ARGENTINA 

AT THE END OF NOVEMBER, THE BEGINNING OF DECEMBER.
UH PRESIDENT XI AND PRESIDENT TRUMP ARE GOING TO MEET.
WHY DID THE WHITE HOUSE ASK FOR THAT MEETING?

PETER NAVARRO: UH IT’S NOT CLEAR THAT THE WHITE HOUSE ASKED FOR THAT MEETING. THAT — THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN REPORTED IN THE PRESS THAT WAY. UH I THINK THAT —

MARGARET HOOVER: APPARENTLY AMBASSADOR BRANSTAD MENTIONED THAT TO THE AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN CHINA.

PETER NAVARRO: UH — YEAH — I CAN’T — CAN’T COMMENT ON THAT. WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THIS.
UH IT’S — IT’S UH NORMAL FOR HEADS OF STATE 

TO MEET IN SIDE MEETINGS AT THE G20 OR AT THE G7, AND — AND THAT WILL HAPPEN. UM AND WE’LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
IT’S NOT A TRADE NEGOTIATION

MARGARET HOOVER: THE PRESIDENT AS RECENTLY AS AUGUST SAID THAT THE CHINESE WERE MANIPULATING THEIR CURRENCY. WHY DO THEY DO THAT? WHY AREN’T WE CALLING THEM OUT FOR IT?

PETER NAVARRO: SO UM UH TREASURY SECRETARY STEVE MNUCHIN GETS 

VERY UH UPSET WHEN OTHERS IN THE ADMINISTRATION TALK ABOUT THE PARTICULARS 

OF CURRENCY MANIPULATION. HERE IS WHAT I CAN TELL YOU AND I THINK —

MARGARET HOOVER: BUT SO THIS IS A — THIS IS A TURF WAR. THIS IS A STAFF TURF WAR?

PETER NAVARRO: HE, YEAH, HE — HE — VIEWS THAT AS — AS HIS — HIS DOMAIN. UM, HERE’S WHAT I CAN TELL YOU UM THAT’S — THAT’S UNEQUIVOCAL. CHINA UNDERVALUED ITS CURRENCY AND WAS THE WORST 

CURRENCY MANIPULATORS GENERALLY RECOGNIZED FROM ABOUT 2003 TO ABOUT 2014.
AND WHEN A COUNTRY

 UNDERVALUES THEIR CURRENCY, WHAT THAT DOES IS IT MAKES THEIR EXPORTS CHEAPER, AND IT MAKES OUR EXPORTS MORE EXPENSIVE.

MARGARET HOOVER:  YOU DON’T THINK THEY’RE DOING IT ANYMORE?

PETER NAVARRO: WELL THERE’S MORE DEBATE ABOUT IT NOW. BUT ITS AN INTERESTING AND IMPORTANT ISSUE.

MARGARET HOOVER: WHAT ARE WE DOING FROM A TRADE PERSPECTIVE, FROM YOUR OFFICE OR FROM THE ADMINISTRATION 

TO COMPETE WITH CHINA NOT JUST IN CHINA, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE SPHERES OF INFLUENCE THEY’RE EXPANDING TO 

LATIN AMERICA, AFRICA, SOUTHEAST ASIA —

PETER NAVARRO: THAT’S A GOOD QUESTION.

THE — THE REALITY IS THAT WE HAVEN’T DONE SOFT POWER VERY WELL FOR MANY, MANY, MANY DECADES.
UH THERE’S AN 

AWARENESS NOW THAT WE NEED TO DO IT BETTER, AND — AND WE’RE MOVING —

MARGARET HOOVER:  YOU MEAN FOREIGN AID?

PETER NAVARRO:  NO, I THINK THAT UH —

MARGARET HOOVER:  FOREIGN INVESTMENT?

PETER NAVARRO: WE GIVE AWAY TOO MUCH MONEY AND GET NOTHING IN RETURN BUT UH THE CONTEMPT OF PEOPLE WHO TAKE IT AWAY FROM US. AND THAT’S NOT PRESIDENT  TRUMP’S STYLE. BUT UM TO THE EXTENT THAT — THAT WE CAN UH HELP

 BUILD UH INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS UH IN COUNTRIES WHERE AMERICAN COMPANIES ARE INVOLVED AND IT BUILDS OUR 

ALLIANCES  AND UH IT’S UH MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL AND IT DOESN’T DRAIN OUR POCKET BOOKS, THAT’S A GOOD THING.  THAT’S — THAT’S SOFT POWER THE TRUMP WAY.

MARGARET HOOVER:  DR. NAVARRO, THANK YOU FOR COMING TO FIRING LINE.

PETER NAVARRO: ALL RIGHT, PLEASURE.
ALL RIGHT.