Oh, For God’s Sake, SolarWorld, Shut The Hell Up
By Chip Martin, Special To Solar Wakeup
When I was growing up, my father taught me two lessons about competition.
First, he taught me that when I lost, I should be gracious, congratulating my opponent and giving them credit when due. Second — and even more importantly — he taught me to be a gracious winner, which meant not belittling, condescending or whining about my opposition.
Which is why SolarWorld needs to shut the hell up.
It is 2 for 2 in its quest to destroy the Chinese solar panel manufacturers and raise prices so it might survive the ongoing shakeout. So why in the name of all that’s holy were they taking potshots at SEIA after the win?
Let’s be clear: I’ve been against these trade cases from the beginning. In 2012, they divided the industry. SEIA stayed quiet, hoping silence would calm the firestorm and SolarWorld would take its victory graciously.
But when SolarWorld filed a second complaint this year, SEIA decided they were done. And Rhone Resch, representing everyone in the industry, publicly criticized SolarWorld’s actions while working feverishly behind the scenes to work out a deal between the two sides.
When Commerce’s decision was announced on July 28, Resch said this:
Enough is enough. The Department of Commerce continues to rely on an overly broad scope definition for subject imports from China, adversely impacting both American consumers and the vast majority of the U.S. solar industry. We strongly urge the U.S. and Chinese governments to ‘freeze the playing field’ and focus all efforts on finding a negotiated solution. This continued, unnecessary litigation has already done serious damage, with even more likely to result as the investigations proceed.
What happened next was just disgraceful. SolarWorld, who, I’ll remind you, had just won its second trade case, just celebrate and move on quietly. Its President Mukesh Dulani wrote a ridiculous open letter bashing SEIA and Resch. I threw up in my mouth a little when I read it.
I’m going to quote it extensively (courtesy of one of my favorite cleantech writers Stephen Lacey, who you should be reading religiously), emphasis mine:
First, I wish to express my concern about SEIA’s decision to “condemn” the U.S. Department of Commerce’s recent preliminary determination on anti-dumping duties on solar imports from China and Taiwan. SEIA used this term twice in its media statement. To condemn the Commerce Department determination — the ninth consecutive U.S. government finding of unfair trade practices by the Chinese solar industry — is both inappropriate and wrong.
As SEIA is well aware, all countries and all industries are subject to international trade rules. Such rules ensure that nations and their producers do not create improper barriers to trade and use the false advantages of export dumping or illegal, export-oriented subsidies to prey on the producers of their trade partners. That you sanction the actions of some of your Chinese members to break U.S. laws and World Trade Organization rules raises serious questions about the interests and intentions of SEIA, a trade association that pledged in 2011 to remain neutral in this dispute.
If SEIA wishes to reformulate and resubmit its proposal, I would gladly review it and respond. If we can discuss any new version before you leave for China starting Aug. 8, 2014, for your consultations with Chinese industry and government officials, I believe it would be useful.
It is my goal that both sides will pursue an amicable solution, and I request your support toward this end. In particular, I ask that you cease your improper, divisive rhetoric and advocacy of obsolete proposals, both of which can only thwart progress toward a viable and lasting agreement.
Are you kidding me? Are you flippin’ kidding me? Let’s unpack this idiotic nonsense.
How dare Dulani tell SEIA what it should and should not say on this subject? “Inappropriate and wrong?” “Improper?” “Divisive?” This from a guy whose company is only staying afloat is these trade cases. From a guy whose company’s action has divided the industry. Whose company might single-handedly slow the U.S. solar market.
Holy Moses, that’s some nerve.
And Mukesh, buddy, just because the Commerce Department had been wrong eight times before does not mean it’s OK that they were wrong on the ninth. Moving on.
He’s right when he says that SEIA pledged to be neutral in 2011, in part because Resch and his team could not have imagined, in their worst nightmares, that this zombie complaint would be back two years later. But I’d remind Dulani that SEIA represents everyone in the industry. So their condemnation of your divisiveness was not only justified — it was long overdue.
And Dulani’s indefensible implication that Resch is in the pockets of Chinese manufacturers is just sickening. Hey, I’ve criticized Resch for other things, but I strongly believe he fights hard for the best interests of the U.S. solar market. That commitment is obvious in the way he has handled the second trade case, even if Dulani doesn’t like it.
What defines you as a person is not just how you react when you lose, but how you react when you win. SolarWorld has proven itself to be a sore winner. It needs to stop flapping its gums and stop dividing the industry with its pointless complaints.