Chinese Professor - from Citizens Against Government Waste

This is really impressive! It would be interesting to see a similar commercial on China in trade negotiations. 

Another WTO dispute looming against China?

While foreign companies have long complained against China's indigenous innovation strategy, the USTR has tried to be patient on the issue. However, the wind might be changing with this new article in the Foreign Affairs. 

STRATEGI CHINA DALAM FREE TRADE AGREEMENT: PERTARUNGAN POLITIS ATAS NAMA PERDAGANGAN

My article on China's FTA strategy has been translated into Indonesian. Interested readers can find the Indonesian version here.  

How difficult is it to get Visa into China?

The USTR has just announced two cases filed against China in the WTO. One of them concerns the long-standing dispute between Visa and Union Pay. Another interesting case to watch.

Chinese version of the USTR established

The MOFCOM has established a new post: China International Trade Representative, which will be responsible for conducting bilateral and multilateral trade negotiations. The rank of the post is at full ministerial level, and will be held by a Vice Minister of MOFCOM. The current Representative is Vice Minister Gao Hucheng.

中央批准设立国际贸易谈判代表 明确为正部长级


2010年08月16日16:31   来源：中国共产党新闻网

　　中国共产党新闻网北京8月16日电（记者 董宇） 今日，记者从商务部网站上获悉，经中央批准，商务部设立国际贸易谈判代表（正部长级，兼任商务部副部长）1名、副部长级国际贸易谈判副代表2名（其中1名由商务部副部长兼任）。日前，国务院任命高虎城为商务部国际贸易谈判代表（正部长级），钟山兼任商务部国际贸易谈判副代表，崇泉为商务部国际贸易谈判副代表（副部长级）。

　　根据中央机构编制委员会办公室的有关批复，国际贸易谈判代表（“China International Trade Representative”）主要职责是：根据国务院授权，负责对外经济贸易领域的重大多、双边谈判工作，协调国内谈判立场并签署有关文件。国际贸易谈判副代表协助国际贸易谈判代表工作。

　　根据《国务院办公厅关于印发商务部主要职责内设机构和人员编制规定的通知》（国办发[2008]77号）有关“商务部在对外谈判和国内协调时使用国际贸易谈判代表办公室名义”及中央编办相关规定，商务部将同时启用“国际贸易谈判代表办公室”名义，对外开展工作。

　　据商务部网站上刊登的简历显示，高虎城于2003年11月任商务部副部长、党组成员，2009年4月至2010年7月任商务部副部长、党组副书记，今7月起任商务部国际贸易谈判代表（正部长级）兼副部长、党组副书记。钟山和崇泉两位商务部国际贸易谈判副代表（副部长级）此前分别担任任商务部副部长和部长助理职务。

Minister Chen in FT

Minister Chen Deming of MOFCOM recently published an op-ed piece in the FT. This is apparently in response to the earlier criticisms against China's indigenous innovation policies (which has been changed) and its offer in the GPA accession negotiation, which has been perceived as insufficient. 

商务部部长陈德铭在英国《金融时报》上发表署名文章：繁荣的中国将更加开放

2010-07-28 15:21 文章来源：商务部新闻办公室
文章类型：原创 内容分类：新闻

　　近日，商务部部长陈德铭在英国《金融时报》上发表署名文章《繁荣的中国将更加开放》（英文标题为"Thriving China is ever more open for business"），全文如下：



Thriving China is ever more open for business


　　For the last year, China has expanded domestic demand and worked to attract foreign investment, contributing to the global recovery. However, concerns have recently been floated, not least among foreign businesses, that China is now less welcoming of foreign investment. In fact, China will open wider in the future.

　　China has kept its market open throughout the financial crisis. In late 2008, we adopted a Rmb4,000bn stimulus package, along with readjustment programs in sectors such as information communication technology, logistics and equipment manufacturing. Companies have followed strict tender rules to ensure a level playing field for all businesses – Chinese or foreign. In 2009, of 12,439 tenders for procurement of electromechanical products, 55 per cent went to foreign investment enterprises.

　　Over the last three decades, foreign direct investment has brought capital, advanced technologies and business know-how to China. We understand that FDI fosters innovation. That is why, in April, we held a public consultation to review the criteria we use to accredit "innovation products". The results emphasized that all foreign enterprises are given equal treatment and that all their products are considered to be "made in China", while the same rules of origin are applied to them as to Chinese products.

　　Since joining the World Trade Organization, China has continually lowered the entry threshold for foreign investment. We have revised our catalogue for the guidance of foreign investment industries – the official list of industries in which FDI is encouraged or restricted – four times since 1997. Each time we have provided greater market access. Writers such as Thomas Friedman, author of The World Is Flat, and Robert Shapiro, former US undersecretary of commerce under President Bill Clinton, have spoken highly of our efforts to open up.

　　China remains a top destination for investment by multinational companies, particularly in services and outsourcing. In 2009, global FDI dropped by nearly 40 per cent, but investment into China fell by only 2.6 per cent. Reacting to worries in the west, China has also strengthened intellectual property protection with new laws and a "double-track" system of administrative and criminal enforcement.

Crisis-hit multinationals have found new sources of profit growth in China. In 2009, General Motors filed for bankruptcy in the US, but its sales in China grew by 67 per cent. It sold more than 1m vehicles in China in the first five months of this year, meeting half of its 2010 target of 2m ahead of schedule. Siemens will invest €1bn ($1.29bn, £843m) in the next three years, with Volkswagen adding €1.6bn by 2011. In 2010, there were 690,000 registered foreign companies in China, investing more than $1,000bn.

　　These companies drive growth abroad through their Chinese operations. They create valuable trade surpluses for neighbouring countries by importing intermediate goods, and create jobs in developed countries by buying capital goods and services.

　　Such growth will continue as China expands its internal market. Sales of consumer goods rose in 2009 to Rmb12,530bn, contributing more than half of gross domestic product. This year China's domestic market will grow by Rmb2,000bn ($295bn, £193bn, €229bn), outstripping exports. The US is set to gain in particular. The independent American Chamber of Commerce in China recently published a report arguing that in the next 30 years the US can achieve "three trillion-dollar goals": $1,000bn for annual US exports to China, $1,000bn for revenues of US businesses in China producing goods and services for the Chinese market, and $1,000bn for cumulative Chinese FDI in the US.

　　Coming out of crisis, China must now work to upgrade its own industries in areas such as high-end manufacturing and environmental goods and services. To do this, China wants to make better use of the knowledge and expertise of multinationals. German carmaker Daimler's success in forming a joint venture in China to develop next-generation electric vehicles is only one example of how more foreign investment can help.

　　The world economy is at a crucial stage of restructuring. As China works with others to push the global recovery, tremendous opportunities will open up for foreign companies. China remains open for business, and the rest of the world can benefit.



繁荣的中国将更加开放


　　过去一年多来，中国政府努力扩大国内消费，积极吸收外商来华投资，为世界经济复苏做出了贡献。然而，近来出现了一些担忧，特别是在外企中间，认为中国不再像以前那样重视和欢迎外资了。事实上，中国今后将更加开放，中国市场的大门始终对外资敞开。

　　在金融危机期间，中国政府坚持对外开放政策不动摇。2008年末，我们推出了规模为4万亿的一揽子刺激方案，同时启动了电子信息业、物流、装备制造等产业的调整和振兴规划。在一些重点领域投资和建设项目招标过程中，我们为所有企业（不管是中国企业还是外国企业）创造公平的竞争环境。例如，在2009年中国开展的12439个机电产品国际招标采购项目中，外资企业中标数占项目总数的55.4%。

　　30多年来，外商直接投资的引入不仅带来了资金，更带来了先进的技术设备、管理和经营理念，有力地促进了中国经济制度、技术和管理创新。正因如此，我们在今年4月公开征求意见，对"自主创新"产品的认定标准进行了调整，上述结果说明，所有外国企业都得到了一视同仁的对待，他们的产品被视为"中国制造"，和中国企业的产品适用同样的原产地规则。

　　自从加入世界贸易组织以来，中国不断降低外资准入门槛。1997年以来，我们4次修订《外商投资产业指导目录》——该目录是鼓励或限制外国直接投资进入的行业的官方名录，每次修订我们都会进一步扩大市场准入范围。《世界是平的》一书的作者托马斯•弗里德曼，以及曾在美国总统比尔•克林顿时期担任商务部副部长的罗伯特•夏皮罗等众多专家均高度肯定中国的对外开放。

　　目前，中国仍是跨国公司投资的首选目的地，特别是在服务业和外包行业。2009年，全球外国直接投资下降近40%，但对华投资仅下降2.6%。作为对西方担忧的回应，中国不断加大保护知识产权力度，制定了一系列比较完整、在世界上也比较先进的保护知识产权法律体系和行政执法、刑事执法双轨的执法机制。

　　在危机中遭遇巨大冲击的跨国公司，在中国找到了新的发展空间和增长点。2009年，通用汽车在美国申请破产，但该公司在华销售却增长了67%。今年头5个月，该公司在华销量超过100万辆，提前完成了今年目标（200万辆）的一半。西门子计划未来三年在华投资10亿欧元（合12.9亿美元)，而2011年之前，大众将在华追加16亿欧元的投资。截至今年5月底，在华注册外资企业数量累计近69万家，实际利用外资总额超过了1万亿美元。

　　这些跨国公司通过在华经营带动了其海外发展，同时也通过大量的中间品进口为周边国家和地区创造了贸易顺差，通过资本品、奢侈品和服务贸易进口为发达国家创造了大量的就业机会。

　　随着中国扩大其国内市场，这种增长势头仍将继续。中国2009年实现社会消费品零售总额12.53万亿元人民币，对国内生产总值的贡献率达到50%以上。今年，预计今年国内市场规模将超过2万亿美元，远远超出中国的出口总额。美国将肯定从中获益。中国美国商会日前发布报告称，在未来30年的中美关系中，美国可以实现"三个1万亿"目标，即美国对华商品和服务年出口额1万亿美元、美国企业在华产值1万亿美元和中国对美累计投资1万亿美元。

　　在走出危机的同时，中国必须致力于自身的产业结构调整和升级，积极发展高端制造业以及环境产品和服务等领域。中国政府希望继续发挥跨国公司在这些领域的人才、技术、管理优势，促进中国加快转变经济发展方式。近日德国戴姆勒公司在华设立合资企业开发新一代电动汽车，这是外国投资将在中国发挥更大作用的一个很好例证。

　　世界经济正处在结构深化调整的关键时期。随着中国与其它国家共同推动全球复苏，将会给外国企业带来巨大的商机。中国将继续坚持对外开放，全球其它国家将因此受益。

In Remembrance of Mr. S. Tiwari, 20 Dec 1945 – 26 Jul 2010

Mr Sivakant Tiwari, a former senior official in the Singapore government, passed away on July 26. He had a long and interesting career, which included drafting the TRIPS Agreement during the Uruguay Round (hammering our details on difficult issues such as compulsory licensing and parallel imports), working on the establishment of diplomatic relations with PRC (trying to find language that is acceptable to both China and Taiwan, a long-time friend of Singapore), negotiating the Singapore-US FTA (again IPR issues became key), working on the Pedra Branca case at the ICJ, and last but certainly not least, working as a Panelist in the China - IPR case. 

More info about Mr. Tiwari, including tributes to Mr. Tiwari by Senior Minister Prof. S. Jayakumar and Prof Tommy Koh, can be found at the website of the Centre for International Law of NUS. 

MOFCOM statement on WTO Honor Day at Shanghai Expo

On the occasion of the "WTO Honor Day" at the Shanghai Expo 2010, MOFCOM issued a statement on "China and WTO: Retrospect and Prospect". Part 3 includes some interesting info on China's participation in the DDA:

三、中国积极推动多哈谈判，全面参与WTO各项活动

　　多哈回合谈判是WTO发起的第九轮多边贸易谈判，是迄今涉及范围最广、参加成员最多的一轮谈判，其成功将有助于创造更加开放、公平的国际贸易环境、推动世界经济的复苏和可持续增长。

　　中国始终积极推动多哈谈判，与世贸组织所有成员一道，密切合作，推动谈判取得公平、平衡的结果，实现发展目标。中国积极参与了世界贸易组织部长级和高官级的谈判和磋商，举办了2005年大连WTO小型部长会，在同年12月香港举行的WTO第六届部长会上发挥了桥梁作用。在2008年7月小型部长会上，中国受邀参与"七方"（G7）部长小范围磋商，首次进入多边贸易谈判核心决策圈。中国从大局出发，努力弥合各方分歧，始终不放弃推动谈判达成共识的努力。虽然谈判最终破裂，但中国所发挥的作用有目共睹。2009年，为打破僵局，推动谈判。中国及时提出"尊重授权，锁定成果，多边谈判为基础"的三项谈判原则，得到了大多数成员的认可和支持，并体现在二十国集团峰会宣言中。2009年底的WTO第七届部长级会议上，中国呼吁改善和加强以世界贸易组织为代表的多边贸易体制，推动成员共同向世界发出"开放、前行、改革"的积极信号。

　　中国全面参与各个领域的谈判，提交了100多份提案，在技术层面为推动谈判做出了实质性贡献，并做出了实质性的关税削减承诺，按照目前谈判达成的结果，中国的农业和工业品的关税将削减30%左右；中国的服务业部门也做出了一些新的开放承诺。

　　在贸易政策审议方面，中国加入WTO九年来，分别于2006、2008和2010年接受了WTO的三次贸易政策审议，回答了60余个成员提出的近3700个问题。通过审议，展示了中国坚定实行开放的经贸政策，参与多边贸易体制的负责大国形象。

　　在发展方面，中国积极响应WTO"促贸援助"倡议，多次向促贸援助框架下的多哈发展议程全球信托基金进行捐助，帮助其他发展中成员，特别是最不发达成员，从多边贸易体制中全面获益，并更好地融入世界经济。

　　中国一贯遵守WTO规则和加入WTO承诺，并积极通过WTO争端解决机制化解与成员间的贸易争端。按照事项统计，中国加入世贸组织以来，起诉案件有7起，被诉案件有8起。中方愿意与其他WTO成员一道，维护多边贸易体制的严肃性和权威性。

　　中国还积极支持WTO机制建设，先后向WTO推荐了上诉机构成员人选以及相关委员会主席人选，支持WTO能力建设活动，多次为促贸援助捐款，支持最不发达国家提高参与多边贸易体制的能力，还为越南、老挝、白俄罗斯等正在加入WTO的国家提供了官员培训等。

　　加入WTO九年的历程再次证明加入世贸组织决策是符合中国国情的，是高瞻远瞩的历史性决策。中国有效利用世贸组织这个多边舞台，抓住经济全球化的历史机遇，成为发展中国家积极融入全球化进程的一个典范。中国负责守信地履行承诺，积极为加强多边贸易体制做贡献，不仅为自身的经济社会发展注入了强大的活力，也赢得了世贸组织成员和国际社会的广泛肯定和赞赏。

The WTO gets lyrical

The WTO has just posted an invitation to take part in the poetry competition "The WTO: A Vision in Verse". I'm not sure how many young poetic minds end up in the WTO Secretariat or trade ministries, but many anti-WTO protesters are certainly masters in creating slogans, poems, posters and live shows. Now it's the time for the aspiring poets at Centre William Rappard to fight back. 

Pro-tradians of all countries, unite!

The WTO Speaks (in Double Speak)

In a keynote speech to the World Input-Output Database Conference in Vienna on 26 May 2010, DDG Alejandro Jara spoke in defense of China. Here are a few punch lines from his interesting speech:

Nowadays, in international trade of manufactures, what you see is no longer what you get: the label "made in ... " can be misleading. Let's take for example the new gadget launched by Apple, the iPad. According to a recent report, the imported cost of a mid-range iPad imported from China into the US is about US$ 290. But the Chinese content is only 5 per cent of the commercial value registered by customs, while most of the electronic content actually comes from South Korea, Japan and the US while batteries are manufactured in Honk Kong, China, by a Japanese company.

......

Trade in tasks calls for a new measurement of international trade: The Value Added Content, or domestic content of trade. To take one of my examples, if we want to assign to each country of origin the value added imbedded in an iPad imported by the U.S. we must be able to measure how much comes from China, Japan or Korea, and, of course, from the US.

......

To illustrate the usefulness of the new global statistics that can be derived from interconnecting national productive and financial accounts, let me mention one of the most heated debated issues among economists nowadays: the rebalancing of the global economy.

The large imbalances accumulated during the 2000s are often blamed for the 2008-2009 crisis. And most analysts highlight the large bilateral imbalance between the existing super-power, the US, and the new world manufacturer, China.

But relying on conventional trade statistics gives a distorted picture of trade imbalances between countries. As we saw when looking at the Chinese content of the iPad, what counts is not the imbalances as measured by gross values of exports and imports, but how much valued added is embedded in these flows. The WTO estimate, based on IDE-Jetro data, estimates that 80 per cent of the value of the goods exported by the US had a domestic content. The comparable figure was 77 per cent in the case of Japan, 56 per cent for Korea. It was about 50 per cent for Malaysia and Chinese Taipei, meaning that half the value exported by these countries originated from other countries.

Using conventional trade statistics would overestimate the US bilateral deficit vis-à-vis China by around 30 per cent as compared to measuring in value added content based on input-out matrices. The official figures for the bilateral deficit would be cut by 50 per cent when the activity of export processing zones in China and Hong Kong, China, re-exports are fully taken into account. By the same token, measured in domestic value added content, the bilateral deficit of the US with Korea or Japan, the main providers of electronic parts in our iPad example, would increase in proportion to the reduction of the US — China deficit.
This implies also that traditional exchange rate policies won't fully help in rebalancing apparent bilateral imbalances. If the Chinese value added in US imports from China is just half its commercial value, a revaluation of the Chinese Yuan will increase the costs of Chinese goods by only half the rate of the revaluation. In the case of consumer electronics, the impact will be even less than that, and only 20 per cent of the variation in the exchange rate will pass through the price paid by importers.

This shows that, as DG Pascal Lamy said recently at the Paris School of Economics, it is time to start measuring trade in value added rather than on gross value as is the case today!

I guess DDG Jara must be holding a copy of the joint US-China Report on Statistical Discrepancy during the speech. At the same time, in its TPR Report issued on Monday, the Secretariat criticized China for its export restrictions on raw materials, an extremely rare move as the Secretariat has in general avoided commenting on on-going DS cases before the WTO.  

Which one is the true voice of the WTO?

New article in the JWT on the Chinese Section 301

The abstract is provided below. Interested readers can find the article at http://www.kluwerlawonline.com/document.php?id=TRAD2010023

Henry Gao, 'Taking Justice into Your Own Hand: The TBI Mechanism in China' (2010) 44 Journal of World Trade pp. 633–659

Summary:
To protect the trade interests of their firms in foreign markets, several countries have established various institutional arrangements. For example, the United States has the section 301 procedure, while the EU has the Trade Barrier Regulation (TBR). Learning from their experiences, China also established its own Foreign Trade Barrier Investigation (TBI) mechanism in 2002. This article starts with a discussion on the background for its establishment as well as the substantive and procedural requirements for investigations under TBI. In the next part, the article discusses how TBI has worked in practice by reviewing the Japan – Quantitative Restrictions on Laver case (hereinafter 'Japan–Laver case'), the only case that has ever been brought under the mechanism. Drawing from the lessons learnt from the Japan–Laver case, the article then offers suggestions on how the TBI might be improved in the future. The article concludes with observations on the possible implications of the TBI on China's trade partners and the multilateral trading system as a whole.

Official Launch of the WTO Chairs Program in Geneva

I was in Geneva last week for the launch of the WTO Chairs Program at the WTO Secretariat. Among the 14 institutions selected, three are from Asia countries, i.e., China, Indonesia and Viet Nam. Below is the speech by Lamy at the opening ceremony.

Lamy congratulates the 14 institutions selected for the WTO Chairs Programme

At the formal launch of the WTO Chairs Programme for developing countries, held at the WTO on 25 May 2010, Director-General Pascal Lamy welcomed the chairholders from 14 universities from around the world selected to participate in the first phase of the programme. "The award of a Chair is an acknowledgement of the competence of the selected institutions and the dedication of its scholars," said Mr Lamy, as he wished them every success in developing their partnership with the WTO. This is what he said:

Good morning. I would like to extend a warm welcome to all of you on the occasion of this formal launch of the WTO Chairs Programme. I should particularly like to welcome those of you from out of town, both the Chairholders from 14 universities around the world, and those members of the Advisory Board who were able to find the time to come to Geneva. It is also good to see some of the Geneva trade community here in support of their national WTO Chairholders.

As many of you know, the WTO Secretariat has been entrusted by the WTO membership to cooperate with governments in developing countries to enhance knowledge and understanding of the multilateral trading system and to facilitate more effective participation in its work. This is the raison d'être of our technical cooperation programme. Our efforts in this area have expanded considerably since the beginning of the Doha Round in 2001. We take this mandate very seriously and we are always on the lookout for ways of improving our game. We care about this because we believe that trade is an essential accompaniment of growth and development, and in order to benefit fully from the opportunities offered by trade, countries must be expert in identifying their trade interests, articulating them, and negotiating with trading partners for mutually beneficial outcomes.

For some time now, starting with our regional trade policy courses with which some of you may be familiar, we have sought partnerships with academic communities in developing countries. Since our mandate is to support governments, one might ask why, then, do we seek to work with universities? The answer is simple. We believe that the scholarly community is a source of valuable knowledge in any country. It brings to the table insights, understanding and a legitimacy that outside specialists can only partly hope to offer.

The WTO Chairs Programme, then, is an important plank of the Secretariat's strategy for academic support on capacity building, as reflected in our Technical Assistance and Training Plan. We believe in the particular contribution of national universities and research centres to the discussion and analysis of issues of public interest, including trade policy. Most governments around the world rely on those contributions and analytical capacities to formulate sound policies.

I should like to congratulate the 14 institutions that have been selected in this first phase of the programme. The award of a Chair is an acknowledgment of the competence of the selected institutions and the dedication of its scholars. It is also an encouragement to your researchers and students to take an interest in multilateral trade matters, a cornerstone of international global governance.

As you well know, trade issues by nature require a framework that takes a holistic view of the world economy. This is not only because of inter-linkages among the various sectors in any economy, but also because of the relationships between sectors in one economy and the economies of the rest of the world. Through your analytical contribution, you can help explain the workings, benefits and challenges of the trading system. Academics can help citizens understand and cope with the complexities of international business and globalization. They can also foster greater awareness and informed debate on international trade issues.

The ultimate objective of the WTO Chairs Programme is to strengthen the human and institutional capacities of universities from developing countries to support governments in the formulation of sound trade policies. The programme also seeks, through the Chairs, to support and facilitate the involvement in the process of other relevant stakeholders, such as the private sector, non-state actors and civil society. Policies that are understood and supported by the public at large are far more likely to succeed than those that are simply imposed, whether by internal or external decision-makers.

Each one of the universities selected for the programme has put forward its own work plan, specifying the intended output. I understand that you will be discussing these projects amongst yourselves over the next couple of days. The projects generally comprise a mixture of elements — increased course offerings on trade, policy-relevant research, and outreach activities aimed at raising awareness of trade-related policy issues. These are your proposals, and your projects. You own them. We are here to help, not to lead.

It is in this spirit that we have designated counterparts from the Secretariat to work with the Chairholders. It is for you, the Chairholders, to indicate what you need from us. As I have said, we stand ready to help in whatever way we can, obviously bearing in mind our own resource constraints.

We look forward to seeing progress. I believe that the first two years of the programme are crucial in terms of demonstrating to the WTO membership, and in particular the contributors to the Global Trust Fund, that this is a good way to use their resources. Some concrete output early on in the programme will serve to demonstrate the relevance of this approach, and that will be essential if we are to continue with, and expand, the programme.

Let me, finally, thank the Secretariat staff for their hard work on this programme, which was efficiently steered by Deputy Directors-General Valentine Rugwabiza and Alejandro Jara.

I wish you every success in your endeavours. Thank you for your attention.

Minsiter Chen spoke again on currency & protectionism

The emphases are added by me. 

陈德铭接受《华盛顿邮报》专访

2010-03-30 15:53 文章来源：商务部新闻办公室
文章类型：原创 内容分类：新闻

　　3月21日，商务部长陈德铭在京接受了《华盛顿邮报》记者专访，回答了关于如何看待美国贸易保护主义抬头、人民币汇率与中美经贸关系等问题，答问主要内容摘编如下：

　　《华盛顿邮报》记者：谢谢您接受我的采访，因为时间有限，我只能提出几个主要问题。现在贸易保护主义趋势好像在美国要浓一些，你对这些贸易保护主义有什么样的看法，怎么解释中国的立场给国外的伙伴？
　　
　　陈德铭：美国到底有没有贸易保护主义?是否趋于严重?有些不同看法。美国政府的一些官员，坚持认为美国没有贸易保护主义。但是美国有些人也承认他们有一点保护主义。有一个得过诺贝尔奖的美国经济学家说,美国现在实行温和的保护主义，但还不够，要实行更强有力的保护主义。我个人认为，美国在金融危机后期是有保护主义倾向的，比如对中国发起轮胎特保案。尽管就全球来讲，国际贸易中的保护主义还大体处于一个可控的阶段，但是美国国内一些人近期在一些问题上不断制造声势，可能会使保护主义愈演愈烈，这对美国、对中国，对全球都是很不利的。

　　我们理解，当前美国经济复苏非常需要扩大就业、扩大出口，只有这样储蓄率才会提高，人们的信心才会增加。但从这个角度讲，保护主义无济于事，甚至有害。美国提出未来五年出口翻一番，那么这些出口产品卖给谁呢？如果在进口上采取贸易保护主义，出口肯定也会受到别人的制约。因此，美国有战略眼光、有远见的政治家，应该反对保护主义，应该更加坚定推行贸易自由化、便利化，这样才能使美国的复苏快一点。

　　《华盛顿邮报》记者：最近在美国，很多智库和评论家，包括国会也开始谈人民币汇率的问题，对人民币汇率的情况，能否给我们解释一下中方是什么样的立场。

　　陈德铭：我想首先说明，一国的汇率是国家主权内的问题，不是由双边讨论决定的。在金融危机还没有完全过去，世界经济甚至有二次触底危险的时候，各国货币保持基本稳定有利于经济复苏，这是我的基本看法。

　　人民币汇率最近在美国被炒得比较厉害，国会议员也有一些言论。我看了美国媒体的报道说，美国总是在碰到困难的时候，总是在选举的时候，会找一个替代国。上世纪80年代、90年代曾经是德国、日本，现在是否就该轮到中国了？
最近10年左右，美国一直在说中国人民币汇率低估，那么用什么标准来判定汇率低估呢？汇率是多方面因素形成的，用“购买力评价法”看汇率，中美两个国家之间是没法比较的。中国人均GDP只有3000美元，美国要超过4万美元。我在学经济学的时候看了很多美国人的教科书，按照他们的说法，综合比较法要比简单的购买力评价更科学。

　　评估一国汇率问题，另一个重要因素是看实际的国际收支状况，特别是在一般项目下即贸易项下的平衡状况。中国的对外贸易有一定顺差，2008年有2900亿美元，但2009年下降到1900亿美元，今年1-2月份再次下降50%，3月份我们甚至可能会遇到逆差。也就是说，中国的国际收支平衡状况正在改善，贸易顺差逐步减少。

客观分析中美贸易不平衡


　　中美贸易中，中方确实有较大的顺差。对此，我们应该全面地讨论和分析。

　　第一，从国别情况看，中国去年的顺差中73%是来自美国，但中国对周边国家有1200多亿美元的逆差，对拉美国家、对世界上58个最不发达国家总体也是逆差。

　　第二，中国对美国的贸易顺差，和美国公布的数字有很大差距。中美两国商务部就这些数字进行多年的研究，今年3月4日两国商务部的主管副部长签署发表了一个共同研究报告。以2006年贸易情况为例，美国公布的逆差统计数字应减少26%，而中方的贸易顺差统计则大概低估了2%左右。为什么会有这么大的差别呢？这些差异中约有52%来自中国经第三方到美国的转口贸易，在转口过程中的增值部分计入了中国的出口；还有48%左右的差异是在中美直接贸易中产生的，这些产品在中国海关报关的时候是一个较低的价格，到美国海关进口时价格提高了。因为这些产品主要是加工贸易产品，所以美国企业把设计、研发、物流、利润全部加进去了。

　　第三，我们要分析中国对美国的贸易顺差是怎么来的。

　　从贸易方式看，中国与美国在一般贸易上是基本平衡的，顺差主要是加工贸易造成的。从企业主体看，2009年，中国对美有1400多亿美元的顺差，其中约有76%是外资企业造成的，而这些外资企业，主要又是美国在华投资的企业。从产品来讲，中国对美国的贸易顺差最主要是来自电子信息技术和机电设备类，这些产品占了67%，大部分是在华加工装配的。

　　造成中美贸易顺差的根本原因是在全球化过程中，产业结构发生调整变化。很多对美出口的企业，看到中国劳动力成本的优势，把最终装配转移到中国，比如日本、韩国、台湾的企业，也包括一些美国企业。这种产业转移导致中国对美顺差增加，但是从美国统计看，美国对亚洲的逆差占其贸易逆差的比重并没有明显变化，只是在亚洲国家和地区之间发生了转移。

　　导致中美贸易不平衡的第二个重要原因是美国对中国采取非常严格的出口管制措施。这一做法已延续多年，2007年，美国还将中国单列，专门针对中国一国增加出口管制项目，包括纤维材料、数字机床、一些集成电路设备等，一共47项。我举过一个例子，中国汶川地震的时候，我们希望买几台美国黑鹰直升飞机的发动机用于抗震救灾。尽管这个发动机厂在加拿大，美国GE公司只有25%的股份，但美国政府还是没有同意。如果美国不愿卖这类高技术产品，我们只好自己花力气来研发，或者从其他国家购买。

　　如果美国继续对中国采取非常严格的出口管制，不仅对中国不利，而且对美国人民、美国企业也非常不公平。现在，美国企业遇到这么多困难，美国失业率这么高，美国也有优势产品可以卖给中国，但美国企业却不能自由地开展贸易。美国可以把黑鹰直升飞机卖给台湾，但不能卖给大陆，那么我们只好和欧洲国家联合来研发直升飞机，同样的例子还有卫星。我不知道是不是个别人还有冷战思想，所以要坚持对中国实行严格的出口管制。这样的制度和做法对美国非常不利，中国也会受到损失，美国人民要知道真相，国会和议员要知道真相。

　　半年多前，奥巴马总统已经表示要放宽出口限制，我们希望看到美方的实际行动。美国提出出口五年要翻一番。现在美国有1万多亿美元的出口，翻一番要达到2万多亿美元，这些出口产品要卖给谁呢？最有潜力的是应当中国这样的新兴市场，2008年中国占美总出口的比重是5.5%，去年增加到6.7%。2001年的时候，中国自美的高技术产品进口占中国同期进口的18%，到2008年这一占比下降到不足7%。这意味着美国损失300多亿美元的贸易机会，这对美国来讲是很可惜的。在贸易受到限制，我们想买的产品买不到的情况下，讨论汇率问题是不公平的，也没法得出正确的结果。

　　第四，关于美国的逆差，如果从经济学的角度说得更深一些，存在一个所谓的“特里芬难题”，这是美国耶鲁大学的一位教授提出的。美元作为国际货币，要满足世界各国在贸易结算、债务清偿和国际储备的需要，必然会通过国际收支逆差使美元流出。随着国际贸易和投资的扩大，全球对美元的需求增多，这需要更多的美元流出，但长期逆差又威胁美元币值的稳定。在布雷顿森林体系中，正是由于“特里芬难题”的出现，美元最后与黄金脱钩。所以从总体上看，美国的巨大逆差还与当前国际货币体制有关。

贸易争端对中美均无益处

　　中美双方应该认真落实胡锦涛主席和奥巴马总统关于建设21世纪积极合作全面的中美关系的共识。遇到问题，大家都要冷静。中美互相依存，谁也离不开谁，我们不希望因为这些问题影响两国关系。如果某些美国议员坚持要给中国强加一个操纵汇率的名义，而且在这个名义下，真的对中国实行惩罚性进口关税，中国政府对此不可能不做出反应。

　　我们希望不发生这种事，如果真的发生这种事，对全球都没有好处，OECD有一个报告指出，中国汇率稳定对大部分不发达国家和新兴国家的经济发展非常重要。经过多年的努力，中国现在的出口结构和那些不发达国家已经错位了，中国的进口对他们很重要。您可以参考OECD的这个报告。

　　如果真的因为汇率问题挑起一场“贸易战”，其实我不想用“贸易战”这个词，但是最近在美国媒体上我们确实看到了类似的表述，当然中国会受损失，但美国企业受损失最大。中国的出口企业中有大量是美资企业，一旦两国贸易环境有变化，他们首先会受影响。

　　我还想进一步举例说明这个问题。中国对美国出口量最大的产品是笔记本电脑，一年有1.47亿台，里面绝大部分芯片使用的都是Intel或者AMD，大量的零部件也来自进口。一台在美国零售价1200美元的电脑，中国企业只能拿到35美元的加工费。如果人民币升值，中国出口不了这些产品，那么相关零部件也进口不了。这样不仅在华美资企业受影响，美国本土企业对中国的出口也会受到巨大的影响。

　　2008年在华美资企业约有3万家，总销售额为2286亿美元，其中1500多亿美元是在中国市场销售的，剩余700多亿美元全部出口，大量返销美国。我最近请美国在华的一批世界500强企业来座谈，听取他们的意见。所有企业都认为，他们在中国的业务是全球增长最快的，利润增长最大的，要继续在中国投资，这些公司从巨额利润里返回一部分帮助美国母公司，或者其他分公司渡过困难。

　　此外，在服务贸易方面，中国有很大的逆差，美国的四大会计事务所，保险公司等各类金融机构在中国都有大量的业务，中国每年也有大量人员到美留学、旅游。现在我们之间没有完整的服务贸易统计数字，我们估计中方的逆差最少在130亿-150亿美元之间，

　　中美经贸关系如此紧密，我们不愿意看到双方发生所谓的贸易战，大家都应理智地坐下来讨论，不要轻易给别人扣帽子，中国也不可能因为被扣上帽子就换个说法。

　　我想美国应该有所调整。我不知道一些议员这么强硬，最后想得到什么东西，是为了政治上的选举？还是出于经济考虑？从经济上讲，是想限制自中国的进口，还是想扩大美国的出口？如果是限制进口，那么中国产品即使进不了，美国也会转从其他发展中国家进口。因为，中国主要出口中低附加值产品，美国的长处是高端制造业和服务业。劳动密集型的产品要回到美国本土生产是很难的。试想一下，如果没有美国进口商订货，中国企业也不会开工生产，一定是美国国内有需求才会从中国进口。把中国这个重要的新兴市场打伤了，对美国扩大出口不会有帮助。

　　我曾在哈佛大学短期学习，记得哈佛有一个讲台，上面写着拉丁文“VERITAS”，意思是“真相”。今天和您交流，我也希望把真实情况传递给美国人民。中美之间的各种问题，我们都可以讨论，但是千万别做损人不利已的事，这对中国，对美国都没有好处。

　　华盛顿邮报记者：假如人民币升值会不会在中国产生一些失业问题？

　　陈德铭：温总理已经说过中国的人民币汇率没有低估，应当基本保持稳定，这对世界经济也有利。

　　2005年以来，人民币升值了21%，实际有效汇率也升值了17%左右。中国为此付出了代价，有些企业因此破产，也有一些企业调整结构，往更高端的产品发展。更重要的是，在金融危机之前，全球经济过热，美国市场需求旺盛，人民币升值后，出口商可以把相当一部分压力通过价格转移出去。但现在金融危机还没有过去，国际市场疲软，许多商品的价格尚未恢复到2008年以前的水平。最近我们做过测算，中国出口企业的平均利润只有1.77%左右。在这种情况下，中国企业难以承受贸易条件出现大的变化，毕竟中国也有自身不容忽视的就业问题和经济稳定问题。如果形成人民币升值的强烈预期，还会严重扰乱世界金融市场的稳定。

　　不少人都感觉到，在美国媒体上，不太能听到中国的声音，希望通过您的采访，也多传递一些中国的声音，让美国人民更多地知道方方面面的情况，能够更好地作出判断。在过去的几年里，美国85%的州对中国出口都快速增长，当我在美国各州访问的时候，州长和企业家对我们都很热情，希望我们去那里投资，扩大贸易。我们也欢迎美国的议员多听听选区人民的意见，到中国来看一看。有些人总是认为美国现在面临的一些问题是因中国而起的，这不符合事实。中国和美国是两个重要的贸易伙伴，中国的发展对美国是一个机会，我们应当一起向前努力，让不断发展的中美贸易为两国人民带来更大的利益。

HK's first FTA

HK has just signed its first FTA with a foreign country, the Hong Kong - New Zealand Closer Economic Partnership Agreement. More to come?

China Fights Back on Trade Imbalances and Currency Issue

 This time it is indirect warning only, but a lot of interesting info is revealed at the press conference.

  “中美货物贸易统计差异研究报告暨中美经贸关系”专题新闻发布会

 

2010-03-19 14:19  文章来源：商务部新闻办公室

文章类型：原创  内容分类：新闻

 

　　3月19日，商务部召开“中美货物贸易统计差异研究报告暨中美经贸关系”专题新闻发布会，新闻发言人姚坚主持发布会，商务部综合司司长刘海泉、美大司司长何宁出席并回答记者提问。实录如下：

 

　　姚坚：新闻界的各位朋友，欢迎各位再次来商务部参加专题新闻发布会。在前两天的例行发布会上，我向大家报告了商务部近期的工作情况，今天我们将就中美货物贸易统计差异研究结果及中美双方的经贸关系情况向大家做一个通报。今天我们邀请到了商务部综合司刘海泉司长和美大司何宁司长。

 

　　刘海泉：各位记者朋友大家上午好。今天我想主要给各位介绍一下中美货物贸易统计差异研究报告。这个报告是中美双方共同研究出来的一个成果，并且已经在中国商务部和美国商务部的官方网站上公布，美国商务部已经就此成果举行了新闻发布会。

 

　　首先给各位介绍一下报告的主要内容。大家知道，中美贸易是中国对外贸易当中很重要的一部分，是双边经贸关系中很重要的一部分。长期以来双边贸易的统计存在很大差异，由于运输、保险等方面的因素，各国统计当中是存在或大或小的差异，但中美统计之间的差异多一些，大一些，因此双方成立了联合小组对此进行研究。

 

　　1994年第8届中美商贸联委会时成立了统计小组，决定对双边统计差异问题进行联合研究，当时得出的结论是中国出口货物经香港等地转口运输是造成双边贸易统计差异的主要原因。但随着中美经贸关系的不断深化，双边贸易快速增长，贸易统计的差异在连年增多，因此引起了社会各界的广泛关注。2004年第十五届中美商贸联委会时，双方决定成立贸易统计工作组，对双边贸易的统计差异问题进行再次研究。

 

　　中方统计小组成员包括商务部和海关总署；美方统计小组成员包括美国商务部和贸易代表办公室。这项研究历时5年，期间召开过六次工作会议，双方成员以实事求是、认真负责的态度，创新研究方法，仔细核对了双边贸易的统计数据，在核对范围、研究结果、报告框架等方面达成高度共识，经过双方共同努力，研究取得了积极成果，不但在统计方法差异、第三地转运增值等一些问题上取得了新的突破，而且就直接贸易统计差异的问题进行了研究，找出了主要原因，进行了量化调整，大大缩减了双边贸易总体差异的规模。

 

　　2009年10月在杭州召开的第20届中美商贸联委会上，两国政府签署了《中美货物贸易统计差异研究报告》，今年3月4日两国商务部又在各自网站上公布了该报告全文。按照双方商定的研究范围和研究方法，中方小组选取了2000年、2004年和2006年中美贸易统计数据，按照“东向贸易”和“西向贸易”分组进行了比对。“东向贸易”指中国对美国出口及美国统计的美国从中国进口，“西向贸易”指美国对中国的出口及中国统计的中国自美国的进口。通过数据比对发现：“西向贸易”差异很小，2006年仅为40亿美元，“东向贸易”差异很大，双边统计的差异高达843亿美元，这种差异用一般的统计因素很难解释。我们对“东向贸易”使用了转口增值、大宗商品跟单比对、核对所有商品编码等方法，我们研究结论如下：

 

　　一是中国出口的货物经第三地转运仍然是导致统计差异的一个重要原因。大家知道，中国对美出口的货物中，有一大部分先被运到香港、韩国釜山、中国的台湾、墨西哥等这些地方，在经过分装，分船之后再运到美国的，在这个过程中有的商品会被重新包装，有的经过了简单的再加工，中国进口商品被加价，从而产生一部分增值；另外，部分货物在中国报关时，中国的出口商不知道这个商品是出口到美国，以为这个商品是出口到香港、台湾、韩国，实际上最后的出口目的地是美国，中国根据进口商的报关认为是出口到韩国、香港的，而美国按原产地原则将这些出口统计都归于自中国进口，这也是差异的原因，这两种情形造成的差异，在2006年是441亿美元，占“东向贸易”差异的52%。

 

　　二是直接贸易当中的差异日益显著，是由于双方报价不同造成的。随着中美贸易的快速发展，两国间直接贸易的比重在双边贸易中所占比重越来越高。2006年这一部分占到90%左右，直接贸易统计造成的差异，数目也越来越大，2006年是402亿美元，占总体差异的48%。

 

　　大家可能会问，从中国直接出口到美国，为什么价值上存在差异？主要原因在于加工贸易。中国出口到美国的商品中60%多是加工贸易产品，这些产品在中国出口报关与美国进口商在入关报价时存在很大差异，中国的出口商是不掌握这个差异的，因为中国的出口商只负责接单生产，不掌握设计、销售的环节；进口商的加价过程，中方没有研究之前也是不掌握的。基于此原因，导致美方统计自中国的进口额大于中方统计的对美出口额。

 

　　除了上述两个主要原因，在海关统计当中有一些数据加工处理的的方法上，双方也不完全一致。比如在统计辖区上，美国将波多黎各和美属维尔京群岛作为美国的海关关境，对华的贸易统计中包含了这两个地区的数据，而中国将上述两个地区视为单独行政区，与他们之间的贸易额不计入对美的贸易额，由此也造成了一定差距。另一个原因是中美之间相距遥远，跨年度运输也会造成统计数据在记录的时间上产生差异。比如在本年度内从中国海关已经出关的货物，运输船经过10天、20天的航行，到达美国时可能已经跨年度了，也会造成差异。但是这些因素造成的差异在双方统计数据中互有增减，并且是一个延续的过程，所以对总体的统计差异影响不大。

 

　　我们对这几个方面的统计差异因素经过量化调整，最后得出的结论是美方自华的进口规模下降了很多，中方统计出口的规模也调减了一些。以2006年为例，中方统计的出口从原来2035亿美元，经过比对调整之后调整为2005亿美元，比原来减少2%。美方统计自中国进口从原来的2878亿美元调减为2247亿美元，减少22%；双方统计差异相应由843亿美元调为242亿美元，242亿美元的原因还没有完全量化出来。根据这样可以估算出美方在2006年对华贸易的逆差就由原来美方统计的2326亿美元调减为1734亿美元，减少26%。

 

　　这就是我们双方统计小组经过五年研究得出的基本结论。大家知道这样一个结论是中美双方统计人员共同认可的，也是双方商务部共同认可的结果，是一个共识。按照中美双方的约定，这项研究主要是为了找出双方贸易统计产生差异的原因，而不表示对任何一方已经公布的海关统计数据进行修订或更正。我们都希望这个结果能够使社会各界，包括新闻界的朋友更加客观全面的了解中美贸易发展的真实状况，并且中美双方在研究结束的时候，也一致同意继续丰富现有的工作机制，不断深化双边贸易领域的合作，为双方的经贸合作大局服务好。谢谢各位。

 

　　姚坚：刚才刘海泉司长跟大家报告了中美对于双边贸易统计联合研究的结果，下面我们请商务部美大司何宁司长介绍中美经贸关系的一些情况。

 

　　何宁：刚才刘海泉司长给大家介绍了中美货物贸易统计差异的研究结果。对于货物贸易统计差异，特别是中美双方贸易当中顺、逆差情况的研究结果体现了中美两国都高度重视双边经贸关系的发展。在发展过程当中出现的一些问题，双方只要能够在相互尊重的基础上，通过平等的协商，都可以找到妥善处理这些问题的方法。

 

　　中美经贸关系的发展经过30年的迅速发展，两国经贸合作早从单纯的货物贸易扩展到经济的各个领域。同时，货物贸易的这些统计数字只能体现货物的流向，并不真正反映在货物贸易过程当中双方获利的情况。我们注意到，在中美经贸发展过程中，部分民众和媒体所提出的一些看法并不能客观全面地反映两国经贸关系发展的实际。所以，我在此向各位媒体朋友介绍一下中美经贸关系的总体情况。

 

　　第一，中美经贸关系的发展是中美关系当中最重要、最具活力的组成部分。中美经贸关系是维系两国关系的稳定器，也是两国关系发展的重要推动力，作为世界上最大的发展中国家和最大的发达国家，中美两国在经济结构和经济发展水平方面具有明显的互补性，双方的经贸合作潜力巨大。中美两国在贸易、投资、科技、能源、环境等领域开展了全方位的合作。经贸合作的规模迅速扩大、领域不断拓宽、内容更加丰富、形式也更加多样。

 

　　从货物贸易方面来看，中美双边的贸易迅猛增长，两国建交30多年以来，中美的贸易额从1979年的不足25亿美元迅速增长到2009年的2982.6亿美元，增长了近120倍。按照中方的统计，在过去的五年当中，中美的贸易额年均增长9%，目前，美国是中国的第二大贸易伙伴，第二大出口市场，第六大进口来源地。中国是美国的第二大贸易伙伴，第三大出口市场，第一大进口来源。

 

　　中美在投资领域多年来也进行了卓有成效的合作。到2010年2月底，美国对华投资项目累计达到58362个，美方实际投入达到了628.2亿美元。到目前为止，美国仍然是中国外资最大的来源地之一。同时，中国在美国兴办的贸易型和非贸易型公司也呈现增长的趋势。到今年1月底中国企业在美国的各类投资超过45亿美元，投资范围广泛。

 

　　第二，互利互惠是中国经贸合作的基本特征。中美经贸关系的迅速发展为两国人民带来实实在在的好处。对中方而言，中美经贸合作不仅带来了经济建设所需要的资金、技术和先进的管理经验，还创造了大量的就业、税收等收益。这方面信息很多，大家都已经比较清楚了。为从客观角度评价中美经贸关系，今天重点谈谈美方在中美经贸关系发展当中的获益情况。

 

　　一方面，美国对华的货物贸易出口实现高速增长。中国加入世贸组织以来，已经从2001年的中国作为美国的第九大出口市场跃升为08年美国第三大出口市场。2001年到2009年美国对华货物的出口总额增长262.8%，年均增长达到15.4%，而同期美国的货物出口总额的增长是45.5%，年均增长4.3%。美国对华出口的增长率是同期美国总体出口增长率的5.8倍。美国对华出口年均增幅远远高于美国对其他主要出口市场的年均增幅，美国对华出口额占美国对外出口的比重从2001年2.7%增长到2009年的6.7%。另外，中国已经成为美国许多产品的重要海外市场，中国是美国大豆、棉花最大的单一的海外市场，是美国汽车、飞机的重要出口市场。根据中方的统计，2009年美国对华农业的出口额为140亿美元，为2001年的5倍，美国对华出口农业的农产品占中国农产品总进口额的27%。

 

　　另一方面，美国企业获得从中国进口产品的绝大部分增加值。美国的《经济学家》杂志曾经指出，标有“中国制造”的美国苹果公司的ipod播放器在发达国家市场的零售额是299美元，其中160美元为美国设计营销和零售企业获得，中国组装厂仅赚取每台4美元加工费，美国在华投资企业也通过中国国内市场销售和对美国市场的出口获得利益。这种获益的差异不仅仅体现在这一种产品上，中国货物出口当中百分之四、五十都是由外商投资企业来完成的。这也说明了货物贸易的数据统计掩盖了实际的利益分配情况。

 

　　除了货物贸易，在服务贸易方面，美国企业也获得丰厚的收益。

 

　　在会计业，2008年美国的四大国际会计师事务所在华收入合计超过100亿人民币，占中国全行业收入的34%。

 

　　在银行业，到2009年底，美国在华设立法人银行3家，下设分行15家。6家美国银行在华设立了8家分行，2009年实现的营业收入达到28亿多人民币，净利润达到8.65亿人民币。

 

　　在保险业，2009年底美国保险在华设立的保险公司有12家，2009年原保险保费的收入达到200多亿人民币。

 

　　在证券业，截至2009年底美资的金融机构在华参股设立的合资证券公司有2家，合资基金管理公司有9家。

 

　　在旅游业，2007年中国的旅游游客访美人数是39.7万人次，同比增长24%；2008年中国的游客访美人次达到49.3万人次，同比增长24%。中国游客在美支出也连年增长，2006年是20.7亿美元；2007年是26.99亿美元；2008年是36.14亿美元。

 

　　在教育服务业，2009年中国赴美留学生人数达到98253人，占各国赴美留学人数的14.6%，继印度之后排名第二。比2008年增长21%。

 

　　在法律服务业，截至2010年2月底，美国律师事务所共设立驻华代表处98家，占各国家（地区）律师事务所在华设立代表处总数的33.3%，2008年业务收入为23.14亿元，占各国（地区）律师事务所在华代表机构收入总额的49.68%。

 

　　在航空运输业，2009年美国各航空公司在华运送旅客达到161.12万人，在华运货邮件62万吨，人数比2008年同比略有下降，但是货物的邮件的运送增长了30%。

 

　　在版权转让领域，2008年中国引进了出版物版权一共有16979种，其中从美国引进图书版权有4000多种，中方在双方的图书版权贸易方面有很大的逆差，2008年我们从美国引进的图书种类与向美国输出的图书总类之比33：1。

 

　　在投资方面，美国对华投资已经成为美国对华经贸利益的主要手段。

 

　　首先，美国对华投资的领域广泛。目前美国在对华投资国家和地区中居第四位，中国制造业的29个大类和中国承诺的100个服务部门均有美国投资。

 

　　第二，美国企业在华的投资回报丰厚。中国美国商会对会员公司的调查显示，2008年74%的会员企业实现了盈利，或者盈利颇丰。

 

　　第三，美国跨国公司对在华发展的前景高度乐观。中国美国商会、美中贸易全国委员会、上海美国商会等美资企业商协会组织的调查显示，绝大多数美资企业对在华发展前景表示乐观，并且将中国作为其全球投资的首要市场或者最重要的市场之一。超过半数的企业表示要继续扩大对华投资，绝大多数企业表示其在华经营的目标是进入或服务于中国市场，而不是在中国寻求出口平台。

 

　　另外，中国市场还成为美国制造业企业在金融危机的中的亮点。中国已成为美国某家汽车公司全球第二大市场，2009年其在华销量达182.91万辆，同比增长67%（在欧洲销量同比下降18%）。目前，以销量计算，该公司亚太地区业务的84%集中在中国。另一家美国电气公司2009年在华营业额同比增长14%，为该公司2006年以来在华营业额增长最快的一年。

 

　　美方从中美经贸合作当中获得的宏观经济利益也相当可观。

 

　　一方面，中美经贸合作有助于保持经济稳定。美国从中国进口大量质优价廉的产品，使美国在巨额“双赤字”的压力下，得以维持比较低的通胀力，提高了美国民众的实际消费能力，扩大了消费需求，为美国经济保持增长提供了动力。据摩根史丹利公司测算，1998年到2003年仅童装一项，美国年轻的父母因为购买中国货而节省4亿美元，英国的经济学家所做的统计显示，如果没有中国消费品，美国的物价指数将每年上升2个百分点。

 

　　另一方面，中国购买美国的国债也有利于美稳定金融市场。据美国财政部的统计，截至2009年12月底，中国是第二大持有美国国债的持有国，持有美国国债余额达到了7554亿美元，占美国国债余额的6.3%，占美国对外销售国债余额17.2%。

 

　　此外，双边的经贸关系的互补性也为美国产业升级提供了便利。美国处在全球产业链的高端，将劳动密集型产品转移到包括中国在内亚洲新兴市场，为自身产业向高附加值领域转移创造了条件。根据国际劳工组织的数据，2008年中国人均小时工资仅相当于美国的十分之一，中国有220万人在美资企业工作，质高价优的劳动力资源美国企业的资金、技术及管理优势相结合，使“美国品牌、中国制造”的产品拥有较强的国际竞争力，从而扩大美国企业在国际市场的占有率。以计算机制造业为例，2008年中国生产各类计算机达到1.47亿台，所使用的中央处理器芯片几乎都是从美国的英特尔、超微半导体等公司进口。

 

　　对华贸易的投资还为美国体了大量的就业机会。对华贸易投资加快了美国就业从制造业向服务业转移的步伐。美方统计数据显示，2000-2007年之间美国制造业减少338.4万个工作岗位，而同期服务业增加了823万个工作岗位，总计多创造就业岗位484.6万个，其中贸易和与贸易相关的港口、运输、分销、零售等领域是就业的重要渠道。以沃尔玛公司为例，该公司通过销售中国产品，在全球雇佣工作人员超过200万人，其中大部分在美国本土就业。

 

　　我们认为中美贸易潜力巨大，前景广阔。在互惠互利平等的贸易关系基础上，随着美国经济走向复苏，中国经济继续保持稳定增长，中美贸易也会进入一个新的增长期，双方应该共同努力抓住这个机遇，挖掘潜力，进一步扩大两国的共同利益。2003年温家宝总理访美的时候，两国领导人曾就如何平衡中美贸易达成共识，即实现贸易平衡，应该从扩大美国对华出口入手，而不是限制中国对美的出口，应该从积极的方面妥善处理这个问题。在这方面扩大美国高技术对华出口大有可为。根据中方的海关统计，2001年中国自美进口的高技术产品占中国高技术产品进口总额的18.3%，到了2008年美国高技术产品出口所占的比重下降到6.9%。如果2008年美方仍然保持18.3%的比重的话，美国当年对华产品的出口可以增加387亿美元。这充分说明，美国放松出口管制有助于中美贸易向更加平衡的方向发展。

 

　　随着中美经贸合作不断深入和发展，两国在经贸往来中出现一些问题和摩擦是正常的。正如温家宝总理在“两会”记者招待会指出的那样，中美两国“合则两利、斗则两伤”，双方应该以高瞻远瞩的战略眼光，充分加强合作，冷静、妥善地处理双边经贸问题。经贸问题只有在遵守经济规律的基础上才能比较准确的把握和处理，因此我们要尽一切努力避免将经贸问题政治化，确保中美经贸关系稳定发展的大局。

 

　　我就说这些。谢谢。

 

　　姚坚：下面我们留一点时间给大家进行提问。

 

　　人民日报记者：第一个问题：研究报告主要是针对货物贸易的统计差异进行了解释，不知道服务贸易方面是否也存在类似的情况？第二个问题：刚才何司长介绍的数据比较多，有一点不知道是否能介绍一下：2009年我们在货物贸易和服务贸易两方面，中美之间的数额大概是多少？中美贸易整体之间的顺差情况从中国来讲情况是怎样的？谢谢。

 

刘海泉：你说的服务贸易是否存在类似情况，因为我们没有进行研究，所以还不能够下一个结论，但是方法上我可以给大家做一个简要说明。大家知道货物贸易的统计全球在方法上、制度上是高度一致的，也是比较成熟的，商品出关、入关都是随单登记，是一个货物流程的真实记录。所以双方进行这方面的比较有比较可靠的数据，但是对于服务贸易，目前从全球来讲，在统计制度上应该说不是非常成熟，不是每一单的服务贸易都要做这种记录，很多时候是采取抽取样本的方法。比如商业存在、自然人移动包括各个方面，选取一些样本，跟货物贸易统计方法不一致。因此对服务贸易进行双边的比较会更复杂，并且比较的结果与货物贸易相比误差也不是很准。服务贸易的统计没有货物贸易统计的全面、准确，没有哪个国家做过这种比较，现在没有看到结果。

 

货物贸易方面，2009年中方统计对美出口2208亿美元，从美国进口774亿美元；根据美方的统计，美方对中国出口695亿美元，自中国进口2964亿美元。

 

　　中新社记者：近期中美两国摩擦特别频繁，而且两国关系出现了一种紧张，商务部这方面有没有什么打算去改善？谢谢。

 

　　何宁：刚才我在前面已经讲到，中方对于中美经贸关系基本的评价是互惠互利，只要我们在平等的基础上能够就一些问题进行磋商，避免政治化、避免情绪化，很多问题都可以得到妥善的处理。实际上中美双方对于中美经贸关系的发展都是很重视的，为了保持中美经贸关系的稳定，双方也建立了一些沟通渠道。比如中美之间2006年建立的中美战略对话，奥巴马总统上台之后，去年我们又开始了中美战略和经济对话，再加上中美之间的商贸联委会，这些都是双方对话的渠道，通过这些对话和沟通交流，都能够探讨如何妥善处理这些问题。中方实际上也采取了其他一些措施，比如在过去几年里，每一年都有一些经贸促进团到美国去，开展大量的经贸活动。在2007、2008、2009年，由商协会组织的经贸促进团签署了总数达700多亿美元的协议或合同，对促进中美经贸关系的发展，实现更加平衡的中美贸易起到了积极的推动作用。谢谢。

 

　　中国国际广播电台记者：请问何司长，您在讲话中提到避免中美经贸过程当中的出现的一些问题政治化，实际上政治因素一直在困扰着中美经贸关系。比如说最近美国议员提出要强迫人民币升值，不知道您怎么看这个问题？中方会就这样的问题怎么样与美方进行沟通？另外还有一个细节的问题您刚才提到中国现在已经是美国大豆最大的单一出口市场，而国内业界人士已经对中国大豆产业安全表示担忧，不知道您怎么看这个问题，会不会采取一些措施？谢谢。

 

　　何宁：第一，温总理和美国总统在中美经贸关系问题的有关磋商中曾达成五项原则，其中就讲到不要政治化。我的理解是，我们提出某一项倡议、某一项原则，这个倡议、原则和实际情况肯定是不一致的。这说明实际情况中出现了政治化的情况，不然就不会提不要政治化的原则。中美经贸问题政治化的现象由来已久，这在中美多年来的经贸关系发展中也起了一些消极的作用，所以我们一直坚持和美方讲不要过多在双边经贸关系发展中加入政治因素。但是这个现象在很多情况下往往又是不可避免的，我们要采取措施，通过双方的沟通避免经贸问题政治化的现象扩大，也要避免双方在一些问题上的争论情绪化，尽可能减少政治因素对于两国经贸关系的负面影响，确保中美经贸关系大局的稳定发展，这对两国政府、人民的长远根本利益都是有好处的。

 

　　第二，在世贸规则的大框架下，中美双方的贸易都是一种平等的贸易，不存在某一方要将产品强卖给另一方，或者某一方强买另一方的产品，都是根据双方的需求，在互有利益的基础上进行的。所以中国进口美国大豆的数量是多是少，可能大家的看法不一样。我个人认为，只要符合买卖双方的基本利益，这个贸易就是健康的、正常的。谢谢。

 

　　路透社记者：刚才您讲到经贸问题也可以找到一些妥善的方法来解决这些问题，现在大家所关注的人民币汇率的问题，您觉得有什么样的渠道和办法缓解这个问题呢？刚才您讲到对话的渠道，您觉得这些渠道可以来讨论这些问题吗？谢谢。

 

　　何宁：中美双方沟通的渠道是畅通的，所有双方关注的问题都可以通过这些渠道来讨论。但是这些讨论应该是在科学的基础上，在理性的基础上进行，而不是通过这个渠道由一方给另外一方施压。人民币汇率的问题比较复杂，我不是权威人士，不敢妄加评论。但是，我认为按照我们现在讲的原则，按照平等、互利、互相尊重的原则，任何问题通过正常的渠道加以解决都是我们最佳的期待。如果有一些政治因素加进来，像刚才有的记者提到美国100多个议员提出某一项要求，这样会使整个的形势复杂化，使我们的沟通对话就变得受到外界的干扰，这种发展态势不是我们所愿意见到的。谢谢。

 

　　凤凰卫视记者：第一，昨天我们去采访美国大使，他说在4月15号财政部出报告之前跟中国政府有谈判，我们想问商务部会不会有参加，如果4月15号的报告，把中国列为货币操纵国，商务部有什么对策。第二，听说商务部和贸促会已经向12个行业、1000多个企业征询意见问问他们是否能够承受人民币升值的压力，我们想请问美大司司长，从您的经验来看他们能承受多少的幅度？谢谢。

 

　　何宁：其实汇率的问题，国务院领导，我们的发言人，已经在不少的场合，都做了表示，我们也没有什么其他更多可补充的。

　　

　　凤凰卫视记者：这些企业能接受多少升值的压力呢？

 

　　何宁：在整个研究结果出来之前我们不便加以评论。

 

　　姚坚：商务部并没有牵头做过这样的测试，只是商业协会在征求这方面的意见。

 

　　何宁：我今天讲到的美国从中美经贸关系中获益的情况，只是我们了解到情况的一部分。我们今天讲的意思是让大家客观地来评论中美经贸关系，不要总是认为这其中一方吃亏了，另一方得了利益。从双方贸易基本的逻辑来看，双方都是要获得利润的，没有自己的利益，是不可能看到贸易的持久发展。从这个角度来看，双方的利益肯定是差不多的，不可能是绝对一致，完全对等的，但不会有很大差异，不然贸易无法发展，贸易也不可能具有可持续性。

 

　　刘海泉：我上午给大家介绍的报告是一个内容比较专业、枯燥的内容，大家如果有兴趣还可以在我们的网站上下载这个报告的全文，中英文都有。我们也非常感谢大家对于中美贸易统计问题的关心。谢谢。

 

　　姚坚：谢谢各位。

 

 

How to get rid of a trade deficit/surplus?

The answer is simple: bring in a new set of bean-counters (sometimes from a different country). This is essentially what the MOFCOM of China and DOC of US did in their new "Report on the Statistical Discrepancy of Merchandise Trade Between the United States and China", which was issued on March 4^th (English version here; Chinese version here). After accounting for the differences created by transshipment through HK and other intermediaries, mark-ups, and customs valuation, the discrepancy in the statistics have shrunken from a whopping 84.3 billion USD to a (still large but not so extreme) 24.2 billion USD. 

While this report adds nothing new to the intellectual debate as it has largely confirmed the works by KC Fung and Larry Lau (see this and this) on the topic, this is probably the first time that the US government openly admits that part of the growing deficit with China might simply be statistical rather than substantive.

Now the question is: Does this mean that the US government will soften its stand on the currency issue?

2010 Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law: China and East Asia on the World Stage

On March 27th, I will speak at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law in the Panel on "China and East Asia on the World Stage". My paper is "From Rule Takers, Shakers to Makers: How Japan, China and Korea Shaped New Norms in International Economic Law", which I will present together with my co-author Prof. Saadia Pekkanen, Job & Gertrud Tamaki Professor at the University of Washington. Below is the Introduction part to the paper. 

While the rise of Asia in the international economy has been widely noted, much less appreciated is the way in which that rise has interacted with the forces of international economic law (IEL). Perhaps the most dominant perception among both legal scholars and social scientists is still that formal law does not play much of a role in the East Asian region – that its institutions are weak, that it has a preference for non-legalistic methods and non-binding commitments which also extend to dispute settlement mechanisms, and that in contrast to highly legal systems as, for example in Europe, far more weight should be given to the competition of national economies and ethnic groups in growing markets than legal dimensions in the case of Asia even today.

This very conceptualization that goes within and across Asian countries has also been extended to their behavior at the multilateral and international levels. Yet even those holding to the contrast between high levels of legalization in Europe and North America and low ones in the case of Asia in the early 2000s had also begun to note the increasing role of formal law in Asia.  This shift towards legalism has been most prominent at the global multilateral level as a number of works have stressed the importance of law and legal processes by and for Asian countries in contexts such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) as well as through burgeoning Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs). In this paper we go further and take the first systematic steps towards a comparison of the activities of the dominant players in contemporary Asia, namely China, Japan, and Korea (CJK) with the goal of bringing them into mainstream debates and controversies in IEL.

 Using an interdisciplinary approach combining political economy approaches with legal scholarship, we aim to show how legalization has become a force to contend within Asia. By legalization we mean specifically that, in significant contrast to the past, Asian countries have begun to stress the dimensions of precision (unambiguous rules to require, authorize, or proscribe action), obligation (rules or commitments to bind action), and delegation (third parties to implement, interpret, and apply the rules for disputes or further rule-making) in a wide range of their economic relations. To be clear, we are not stressing that by doing so they are moving toward legal integration, where like the European and Andean cases, formal or informal moves help create a seamless rule of law affecting domestic actors and international tribunals. Rather, driven by their activities at the global, multilateral and now increasingly regional levels, the moves toward legalization should be seen as an evolutionary move toward the creation of the rule of law across borders. Thus as Asian states have begun to stress the dimensions of precision, obligation, and delegation in their economic relationships at present, the sum total of their moves may well go on to have significant implications for the creation of such rule of law systems in the future particularly in their foreign economic diplomacy.

Put simply, then, our main contention in this paper is that Asian states are no longer merely passive rule-takers in a system of IEL still widely thought to be dominated by Western countries, principally the United States and European Communities. Rather, as their economic clout has risen at both the global and regional level, key Asia states such as CJK have become aggressive users of the dispute settlement system of the WTO with novel directions in their domestic institutional landscapes; and they have also moved well beyond the narrow confines of the WTO-centered system to shape even regional and cross-regional legal frameworks to their advantage. How and why did things come to this? What exactly are the legal consequences both for IEL and these countries' domestic legal systems? What does the sum total of these sequential changes portend for the rule of law in CJK and other Asian countries more broadly?

The remainder of the paper is in three parts. The first part provides an analytical framework that stresses the rise and significance of commercial interests operating across borders, irrespective of whether the source is public or private in nature. Thus we are less concerned with whether a government or a business is responsible for economic flows across borders than with the fact that those flows are taking place. It also provides a brief statistical background, placing Asia's economic weight in global and regional context. Although we look at East Asia more broadly in the paper, we focus on the relative weight of dominant regional players, namely CJK which also go on to form the bulk of the analysis in this paper. The second part turns to the empirical evidence, focusing on substantial changes at both the international and domestic levels over the past twenty years that deserve close attention. At the international level, in breaking with their own tradition of being reluctant litigants, CJK along with other East Asian states have started to "shake" the existing power structure by actively using the existing legal rules to advance and defend their own interests in a policy shift to "aggressive legalism." This ongoing policy shift is one of the core elements for fortifying the "rule-based" WTO system, as well as strengthening the trend toward regional interaction on the basis of rules.  But these same states have also moved well beyond the WTO-centered system in the 2000s more visibly, as they have actually started to "make" new norms by proposing new rules at the multilateral level and creating a web of legal agreements at the inter-regional and intra-regional level that aim to reflect their own interests. These instruments span trade, investment, and finance, and are a harbinger of the continued legalization of Asian economic relations. The third part concludes, focusing on the implications of the analytical and empirical evidence for the future of the rule of law in the multilateral and regional system more broadly.

IELPO 2010

I will be teaching at the IELPO program in Barcelona again on March 18 and 19. While the program is only two years old, it has quickly built up its reputation as one of the best programs on trade law and policy world wide. More details about the program can be found here. Interested students shall act quickly as the application deadline is March 31st. 

Teaching trade law in ASEAN

At the invitation of the ASEAN Secretariat and the South East Asia Trade Policy Training Network (SEATRANET), I taught a 3-day workshop on trade policy to government officials and other stakeholders from the ASEAN member countries. More info about the workshop can be found here.

Another case by China in the WTO

商务部新闻发言人就中国政府在WTO诉欧皮鞋反倾销案发表谈话

2010-02-04 16:49 文章来源：商务部新闻办公室
文章类型：原创 内容分类：新闻

　　2010年2月4日，中国常驻WTO代表团致函欧盟WTO代表团，就欧盟对华皮鞋采取的反倾销措施提起WTO争端解决机制下的磋商请求，正式启动WTO争端解决程序。

　　商务部新闻发言人姚坚表示，欧盟对中国皮鞋的反倾销调查和裁决，违反了WTO相关规则，损害了中国企业的合法权益。中国政府在多双边场合多次交涉，中国业界也表示强烈反对，但这些多双边对话始终没有解决中方的关注。中方就此提出WTO争端解决机制下的磋商请求，希望欧盟能够重视中方的强烈关注，在WTO争端解决机制下早日妥善解决问题。

　　1995年至2005年，欧盟曾对中国出口皮鞋实施长达十年的配额限制。欧盟虽根据其在中国加入WTO时所作出的承诺取消了配额限制，但又于2005年在未经客观、公正审查的情况下，对中国皮鞋发起反倾销调查，并于2006年10月作出了裁定，实施为期两年的反倾销措施。2008年10月，在该反倾销措施即将期满之际，欧盟不顾广大消费者的利益和中方的反对，又发起期终复审，并于2009年12月22日决定将反倾销措施再延长15个月。

New Article in the Hong Kong Economic Journal Monthly

I have published a paper on The Economic Crisis, Protectionism and China's New Trade Policy in the Hong Kong Economic Journal Monthly, one of the leading policy journals in Greater China. Below is the capsule summary of the article. Interested readers can get the journal from all major news-stands in HK or the Journal directly. 

經濟危機、保護主義和中國的外貿新政

 

中國在入世至今，走過了一條從被動的接受國際規則，到善於利用現有規則維護本國利益的道路。能夠在短短八年間從一個門外漢變成熟練運用世貿規則的高手，中國的成就相當可觀。但是，擺在中國還有一個更重要的挑戰，那就是學會利用WTO這個平台制定反映中國自身利益的規則。

Interview with Zhou Xiaoyan

Mdm Zhou Xiaoyan, Director General of the Bureau of Fair Trade, was recently featured in an online interview on MOFCOM's website. There are some some interesting info from her interview. The full interview is available here.

1. So far, 79 countries have recognized China's market economy status. Assuming almost all (apparently Russia is not) are WTO Members, this is more than half of the 153 Members of the WTO. This will build up the pressure on other WTO Members to recognize the MES of China.

承认中国的市场经济地位，既符合WTO公平贸易的原则，也有助于拓展中国与其他贸易伙伴间的双边贸易，实现互利双赢。截至目前，已有新西兰、俄罗斯、南非、巴西、澳大利亚、韩国、埃及等79个国家承认中国完全市场经济地位，加拿大也推定中国所有行业为市场导向行业。中国希望有关国家能够客观公正地认识中国市场经济体制建设所取得的成就，积极考虑并尽早承认中国的市场经济地位。  

2. Up to end of 2009, China has initiated 62 ADP investigations, 3 SCV investigation, and 1 safeguard investigations.

从1997年我首起反倾销案至2009年底，应国内产业申请，我国调查机关对共进口产品发起反倾销调查62起，反补贴调查3起，保障措施调查1起。特别是2009年6月，经严格的法律程序和实体审核，商务部对美国进口的取向电工钢发起“双反”调查，这也是我国首例反补贴调查。开启反补贴调查使我挤身少数能运用WTO规则允许的反倾销、反补贴和保障措施全部三种贸易救济措施的成员之列，丰富了我国贸易救济调查的实践，增强了我们全面运用WTO贸易救济措施维护产业安全的能力。

First sermon in the new year from Pastor Lamy

Here are some more interesting thoughts from the "Dalai Lamy", sorry, should be Pascal Lamy. I'm sure some people will get excited if you have the patience to finish this long speech, but the trader lawyer inside me (as many other trade lawyers probably will) has already started asking: "Is that possible? Aren't the WTO DSB supposed to decide cases on the basis of 'covered agreements', which, no matter how desirable it might sound, do not include the UDHR, ICCPR or the ICESCR? Can you really use trade rules to strengthen human rights? Aren't the two regimes supposed to be parallel universes like Pandora and Earth, where human rights is respected on one but not the other?"

On a separate note, I bet 100 THB that, with speeches like this keep flowing during the rest of his DG term, Lamy has a pretty decent chance of getting nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize after his term. 

The full text of the latest "Lamon" is reproduced below, with emphases added by me, and my own comments in italicized font in brackets. 

"Towards Shared Responsibility and Greater Coherence: Human Rights, Trade and Macroeconomic Policy"
Colloquium on Human Rights in the Global Economy, Co-organized by the International Council on Human Rights and Realizing Rights, Geneva, 13 January 2010


The last time we discussed this issue was in the cathedral of Geneva with Desmond Tutu. Putting together the issues of trade and human rights may seem odd. For many, trade is the villain. It is a symbol of mercantilism, capitalism, the tool through which powerful multinational corporations impose their law over human beings, impairing their social, economic and cultural rights. The history of the relationship between trade and human rights is a history of suspicion, and to some extent of deliberate reciprocal ignorance. 

Yet, trade goes hand in hand with human rights. Trade presupposes human interaction, respect and understanding. If conducted with respect, "trade polishes and softens the most barbarous mores", to quote Montesquieu and his theory of "doux commerce".

One too often forgets that human rights and trade rules, including WTO rules, are based on the same values: individual freedom and responsibility, non-discrimination, rule of law, and welfare through peaceful cooperation among individuals. Not only are they based on the same fundamental values; they are also the result of common concerns. Both human rights and global trade rules were considered a key element of the post-World War II order, a rampart against totalitarianism. It is no coincidence that the seeds of the multilateral trading system were planted at the same time as the Universal Declaration on Human Rights was being drafted in the mid-1940s. Both were seen as indispensable to world peace. In spite of these common underpinnings, for decades the interaction between the trade and human rights communities seemed to be governed by distrust.

And yet, human rights and trade are mutually supportive. Human rights are essential to the good functioning of the multilateral trading system, and trade and WTO rules contribute to the realization of human rights.

What role do human rights play in trade? First, civil and political rights are a key ingredient of good governance, which in turn is essential to the proper conduct of trade relations. Freedom of expression, for example, brings transparency, one of the core principles of the world trading system. Secondly, social, economic and cultural rights, often seen as the main victims of globalization and of the opening of markets, are important ingredients for successful trade liberalization. I will come back to this point in a few minutes.

How can trade help promote human rights? I would start by noting that trade measures are the most commonly used instrument in developed countries to put pressure on states violating human rights. (Does this mean that the WTO sanctions such blatant violations of trade rules? Does this mean that trade rules have to be ignored or even breached so that human rights can be restored? Wouldn't this point to inherent conflict rather than complementarity between the two?) 

But more importantly, trade is a means to an end; and the end is raising the standards and conditions of living of all. The objective of sustainable development features prominently as one of the objectives of the WTO. Trade negotiators chose to include it in the preamble of the WTO Agreement (yes the preamble rather than the main text, which means it is not enforceable). How is this goal achieved? The opening of markets creates efficiency, stimulates growth and helps spur development, thereby contributing to the implementation of the fundamental human rights that are social and economic rights. One could almost claim that trade is human rights in practice! 

The reduction of trade barriers in agriculture, enhanced market access for agricultural products and the gradual decrease in subsidies provided by rich countries to their farmers, for example, all contribute to the same objective: the implementation of the right to food for all.

But let me immediately discard a misconception that is unfortunately too widely spread. The primary vocation of the WTO is to regulate, not to deregulate trade as is often thought. By putting in place rules to regulate trade flows and remove trade distortions, the WTO aims to create a global level playing field, where fairness is the rule and where the rights of individual members are safeguarded.

I would note, in this regard, that the case law of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism acknowledged that international trade law could not be interpreted "in clinical isolation" from international law in general. And, incidentally, how could the WTO &mdash created in 1994 by an international legal instrument — be immune to the rules of the general international law from which it derives its mission and its very existence?

Of course, trade rules are not perfect. They may, in some cases, have unintended consequences on human rights. Some claimed so, for example, with respect to intellectual property rights. I sense, however, a growing awareness among trade experts of the importance of human rights and of the role trade can play in promoting and anchoring such rights. The concerns sparked by certain provisions of the TRIPS [Trade-related Intellectual Property Rights] Agreement led trade negotiators to agree, in 2005, to amend the TRIPS Agreement to facilitate access of developing countries deprived of domestic pharmaceutical production capability to affordable medicines. Similarly, discussions are underway about the possible protection of folklore and traditional knowledge.

But let me go back to the question of trade, development, and human rights. While trade can promote development and contribute to the reinforcement of human rights, it is not a panacea. Trade liberalization can entail social costs. To be successful, the opening of markets requires solid social policies to redistribute wealth or provide safeguards to the men and women whose living conditions have been disrupted by evolving trade rules and trade patterns.

This is what I have called the "Geneva consensus", under which the opening of markets is necessary to our collective well-being, but does not suffice in itself.

It does not suffice unless strong safety nets help correct the imbalances between winners and losers at the national level. It does not suffice unless the countries which do not enjoy sufficient human, technical, and financial resources to build the necessary infrastructure or to put in place such safety nets domestically are assisted by the international community. Hence the importance of the WTO mandate of Aid for Trade.

For trade to act as a positive vector for the reinforcement of human rights, a coordinated international effort is needed. A coherent approach, which integrates trade and human rights policy goals, should be developed. Progress can no longer be achieved by acting in an isolated manner. Coherence should become our guiding principle in fostering development and human rights: coherence between the local and the global, between the world of trade and the world of human rights, between the WTO as an institution and the various organizations active in the field of human rights.

Today's world may be flat, to paraphrase Thomas Friedman, but it is not united. It is, on the contrary, more fragmented than ever. The wind of globalization, which has been blowing during the past few decades, has dispersed our energies. We now need to bring them together and act in a coordinated way.

This responsibility lies with all of us. It is the responsibility of the members of the WTO, which are practically all party to either the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to uphold their human rights obligations together with the obligations to which they have subscribed within the WTO Agreement. But it is also the responsibility of the WTO, of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights — which is the custodian of human rights treaties — and of organizations such as the International Council on Human Rights and Realizing Rights to work to institutionalize the relations between the trade and human rights communities. It is our responsibility to coordinate our actions in a meaningful and efficient manner to ensure that trade does not impair human rights, but rather strengthens them. I am aware of the challenge this represents, of the change in mindset this requires.

By having invited me to this event today, a first step has been crossed, and I thank you for having taken this initiative. My hope, as Sir Winston Churchill said, is that "this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

Thank you for your attention.