国 国会钢铁行业议员小组(Congressional Steel Caucus)反对鞍山钢铁集团公司入股位于密西西比州的Steel Development Company，这是在华美国企业的一个主要担忧之源。假若鞍钢的投资成功，将会创造新的就业岗位，给美国带来好处。不过，美国政界人士应该对阻挠交易三 思而后行的原因还有一个：这样做会给美国出口业和在华投资带来深远的影响。
互惠互利是美国一直以来敦促中国接受的贸易投资自由流动的基本 原则。然而，华盛顿有时却言行不一。2005年，中国国有石油公司中海油竞购加州联合石油公司(Unocal)，引发了保护主义者政治上的强烈反对。在美 国没有遵守其投资评估程序之后，中国投资者开始对自己在美国是否受欢迎产生了严重怀疑。
尽管鞍钢的收购交易按合同额来说只是中海油收购交易的一个零头，如今的风险却要大的多。随着全球经济的放缓，保护主义的政治压力高涨。拒绝这桩交易可能会在太平洋地区引发一轮难以阻止的反贸易措施。
对国家安全的担忧只是借口而已。Steel Development Co.从事的是用再生钢铁生产钢筋，尽管该公司的方法具有创新性，生产过程本身技术含量却较低。总产量只占美国钢铁市场的0.3%。鞍钢将收购该公司不到20%的股权，而且没有管理控制权。
政界人士、工会领袖和其他反对交易的利益相关者，不仅将Steel Development Co.工人的工作置于危险中，而且将威胁数十万有望从未来几十年中国在美国其他领域投资中获益的工人的潜在工作机会。
目前，对于外国公司收购中国企业，中国正在考虑自己的国家安全评估，我们希望这个过程将基于谨慎制定的国家安全标准，而不是宽泛定义的排外性的担忧。因此，鞍钢不仅对中国的外商直接投资流很重要，对在华美国企业的收入也很重要。
2009年1月为中美关系正常化30周年纪念。政治领袖重申中美关系是21世纪最重要的双边关系。双方达成了共识：通过合作，中美两国可以解决我们所面临的一些重大问题。
基 于这一精神，中国美国商会已对未来30年作出了展望，我们称之为“三个一万亿”。在未来30年中，我们将看到中美两国有3万亿美元的经济活动：美国每年向 中国出口1万亿美元的商品和服务；美国企业在中国境内为中国国内市场每年生产销售1万亿美元商品和服务；中国企业累积在美国投资1万亿美元以服务美国市 场。
第三个“1万亿”虽然最重要，但最难达到。中国在美国的直接对外投资只占中国对其他发达和发展中国家投资的一小部分。这主要是由双方互不了解造成的。中国企业高管完全不懂得美国政治环境、经营方式和法律体系，而美国政治家和工人严重误解了中国和中国人民。
鞍 钢投资将是中美关系转折点这一说法并不为过。相像一下如果美国股东接受鞍钢投资，这将推动中国民间和国营企业主导的新一轮对美国的直接对外投资。通过改造 传统的现有制造业工厂和新建数百家科技环保工厂，将创造数以百万计的新就业机会，美国政治家和工人将慢慢认识并理解中国引领的对美投资的企业所有者和经理 们，从而认识到较之分歧，他们有更多共同利益。
同样地，中国企业拥有者和经理投入到美国经济中，学习美国政治体系是如何运行的。由于加深了对透明度、法律条例和知识产权保护的理解，他们会在中国国内主张进行改革。随着贸易渐趋平衡和双方政治家更为深入地理解贸易和投资的好处，美国和中国的政治措辞将更加温和。
现 在再想像一下第二种情况吧，在断然拒绝鞍钢的投资后，中国投资者认为他们不受欢迎，他们拿着数十亿美元资本和创新技术到其他地方去了。美国制造业尚未完全 走出全球金融危机的阴影，政治家和工人将美国的问题归咎于中国。中美双方建起非关税壁垒，在中国经济快速增长情况下，中国将用日本和欧洲商品替代美国的出 口商品。商业紧张形势导致全球贸易急剧下降，并使经济出现二次衰退。
作为一个从1982年就开始在中国工作的美国人，我希望美国同胞全盘考虑鞍钢投资提议，让评估程序依照法律来进行。美国企业在中国取得的成绩有赖于我们在对待中国企业的问题上持续作出的平等互利的承诺。
The Congressional Steel Caucus's opposition to Anshan Iron and Steel Group's bid for a stake in Mississippi-based Steel Development Company is a major source of concern to American businesses in China. Anshan's investment would benefit the United States by creating new jobs. But here's another reason why American politicians should think twice about blocking the transaction: Doing so would have far reaching consequences for U.S. exports and investment in China.
Reciprocity is the bedrock principle of the free flow of trade and investment that the U.S. has long urged China to embrace. But Washington hasn't always lived up to its own rhetoric. In 2005, state-owned oil company Cnooc Ltd.'s bid for Unocal provoked a protectionist political outcry. After the U.S. did not follow its own investment-review procedures, Chinese investors began to have serious doubts about whether they were welcome.
Although the dollar amount of the Anshan transaction is only a fraction of the Cnooc bid, the stakes are much higher today. As the world economy sputters, the political pressure for protectionism is high. Rejecting this deal could start a cycle of antitrade measures across the Pacific that would be difficult to stop.
The national-security worry is spurious. Steel Development Co. produces rebar from recycled steel, and while the company's approach is innovative, the process itself is low-tech. The total output represents 0.3% of the U.S. steel market. Anshan will take no more than a 20% stake and have no management control.
Politicians, union leaders and other stakeholders opposing this deal are putting not only the jobs of Steel Development Co. workers at risk, but also the potential jobs of hundreds of thousands of other workers that would benefit from future Chinese investment in other communities in the U.S. over the next several decades.
China is now considering its own national-security review for acquisitions by foreign companies, a process that we hope will be based on carefully drawn national security criteria rather than broadly defined antiforeign worries. Anshan is therefore important not only for the Chinese foreign direct investment flow, but also for the revenue of U.S. entities in China.
In January 2009, the U.S. and China celebrated the 30th anniversary of the normalization of relations between the two countries. Political leaders reaffirmed that the U.S.-China relationship is the most important bilateral relationship of the 21st century. There was a mutual understanding that by working together, the U.S. and China can solve some of the biggest problems we face.
In that spirit, the American Chamber of Commerce in China has developed a vision for the next 30 years, which we call the 'Three One Trillions.' Within three decades, we would like to see $3 trillion of economic activity between the two countries: U.S. exports of $1 trillion annually in goods and services to China; U.S. companies producing and selling annually another $1 trillion of goods and services inside China for the domestic Chinese market; and Chinese companies investing $1 trillion cumulatively in the U.S. to serve the American market.
The third 'one trillion' is the most challenging to achieve, yet the most important. Chinese foreign direct investment in the U.S. is a fraction of what it invests in other developed and developing nations. This is driven largely by mutual ignorance. Chinese business executives have an incomplete understanding of the U.S. political environment, business practices and legal system. American politicians and workers have major misunderstandings about China and the Chinese people.
It is no exaggeration to say that the Anshan investment will be a turning point for U.S.-China relations. Imagine a scenario in which U.S. stakeholders embrace the Anshan investment. This unleashes a new wave of foreign direct investment in the U.S., led by private and public Chinese enterprises. Millions of new jobs are created through reviving traditional brown-field manufacturing plants and creating hundreds of new technology green-field plants. American politicians and workers slowly get to know and understand the owners and managers of Chinese-led U.S. investments and realize they have more shared interests than differences.
Equally, Chinese owners and managers become enmeshed in the U.S. economy and learn how the political system functions. They advocate for reforms at home with their enhanced appreciation for transparency, the rule of law and intellectual-property protection. The political rhetoric in both Washington and Beijing moderates as trade becomes more balanced and politicians in both capitals gain a deeper understanding of the benefits of trade and investment.
Now imagine a second scenario in which, after being rebuffed on the Anshan investment, Chinese investors conclude they are unwelcome. They take billions of dollars of capital and innovative new technology to other regions. The U.S. manufacturing sector fails to fully recover from the global financial crisis, and politicians and workers blame China for America's problems. Both countries erect nontariff barriers, and China's fast-growing economy substitutes U.S. exports with goods from Japan and Europe. This commercial tension leads to a sharp reduction in global trade and a double-dip recession.
As an American who has worked in China since 1982, I urge my fellow Americans to thoroughly understand the Anshan proposal and allow the review process to proceed in accordance with the law. The gains that American companies have achieved here depend on our continued commitment to fairness and reciprocity in the treatment of Chinese businesses.