According to the author the main cause of the issues in Asia is
A. trade and historical disputes.
B. the appreciation of the yuan.
C. Japan's refusal of apology for its wartime atrocities.
D. the rise of China.
Asia's real boat-rocker is a growing China, not Japan, a senior American economist observed.
There is so much noise surrounding and emanating from the world's miracle economy that it is becoming cacophonous. In Washington, DC, the latest idea is that China is becoming too successful, perhaps even dangerously so: while Capitol Hill resounds with complaints of trade surpluses and currency manipulation, the Pentagon and sundry think-tanks echo to a new drumbeat of analysts worrying about China's 12.6% annual rise in military spending and about whether it might soon have the ability to take pre-emptive military action to force Taiwan to rejoin it. So it may be no coincidence that for three consecutive weekends the streets of big Chinese cities have been filled with the sounds of demonstrators marching and rocks being thrown, all seeking to send a different message: that Japan is the problem in Asia, not China, because of its wanton failure to face up to its history; and that by cosying up to Japan in security matters, America is allying with Asia's pariah.
Deafness is not the only risk from all this noise. The pressure towards protectionism in Washington is strong, and could put in further danger not only trade with China but also the wider climate for trade liberalisation in the Doha round of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). So far words have been the main weapons used between China and Japan, but there is a chance that nationalism in either or both countries could lead the governments to strike confrontational poses over their territorial disputes in the seas that divide them, even involving their navies. And the more that nationalist positions become entrenched in both countries but especially China, the more that street protests could become stirred up, perhaps towards more violence.
All these issues are complex ones and, as is often the case in trade and in historical disputes, finding solutions is likely to be far from simple. A revaluation of the yuan, as demanded in Congress, would not re-balance trade between America and China, though it might help a little, in due course. A "sincere" apology by Japan for its wartime atrocities might also help a little, but it would not suddenly turn Asia's natural great-power rivals into bosom buddies. For behind all the noise lies one big fact: that it is the rise of China, not the status or conduct of Japan, that poses Asia's thorniest questions.
From the first paragraph we may see that America's attitude towards China's success is
A. friendly.
B. hostile.
C. objective.
D. prejudiced.
根据《立法法》,下列关于法的效力的裁决的说法错误的是()。A.法律之间对同一事项的新的一般规定与旧根据《立法法》,下列关于法的效力的裁决的说法错误的是()。
A. 法律之间对同一事项的新的一般规定与旧的特别规定不一致,不能确定如何适用时,由全国人民代表大会常务委员会裁决;行政法规之间对同一事项的新的一般规定与旧的特别规定不一致,不能确定如何适用时,由国务院裁决
B. 同一机关制定的新的一般规定与旧的特别规定不一致时,由制定机关裁决
C. 地方性法规与部门规章之间对同一事项的规定不一致,不能确定如何适用时,由国务院裁决
D. 部门规章之间、部门规章与地方政府规章之间对同一事项的规定不一致时,由国务院裁决;根据授权制定的法规与法律规定不一致,不能确定如何适用时,由全国人民代表大会常务委员会裁决
"The time when we could count on cheap oil and even cheaper natural gas is clearly ending." That was the gloomy forecast delivered in February by Dave O'Reilly, the chairman of Chevron Texaco, to hundreds of oilmen gathered for a conference in Houston. The following month, Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez gleefully echoed the sentiment: "The world should forget about cheap oil."
The surge in oil prices, from $10 a barrel in 1998 to above $50 in early 2005, has prompted talk of a new era of sustained higher prices. But whenever a "new era" in oil is hailed, scepticism is in order. After all, this is essentially a cyclical business in which prices habitually yo-yo. Even so, an unusually loud chorus is now joining Messrs O'Reilly and Chavez, pointing to intriguing evidence of a new "price floor" of $30 or perhaps even $40. Confusingly, though, there are also signs that high oil prices may be caused by a speculative bubble that could burst quite suddenly. To see which camp is right, two questions need answering: why did the oil price soar? And what could keep it high?
To make matters more complicated, there is in fact no such thing as a single "oil price": rather, there are dozens of varieties of crude trading at different prices. When newspapers write about oil prices, they usually mean one of two reference crudes: Brent from the North Sea, or West Texas Intermediate (WTI). But when ministers from the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) discuss prices, they usually refer to a basket of heavier cartel crudes, which trade at a discount to WTI and Brent. All oil prices mentioned in this survey are per barrel of WTI.
The recent volatility in prices is only one of several challenges facing the oil industry. Although at first sight Big Oil seems to be in rude health, posting record profits, this survey will argue that the western oil majors will have their work cut out to cope with the rise of resource nationalism, which threatens to choke off access to new oil reserves. This is essential to replace their existing reserves, which are rapidly declining. They will also have to respond to efforts by governments to deal with oil's serious environmental and geopolitical side-effects. Together, these challenges could yet wipe out the oil majors.
Dave O'Reilly and Hugo Chavez believe that
A. prices of oil and natural gas are very high.
B. prices of oil and natural gas will not go down.
C. oil and natural gas will keep sustained high prices.
D. the world has forgotten about cheap oil.