tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-168688852164897628.post2864633953108748553..comments2023-08-18T19:59:08.277+08:00Comments on WTO AND CHINA 世贸组织与中国: China's First Defeat in the WTOHenry Gao 高树超http://www.blogger.com/profile/14269117737303166784noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-168688852164897628.post-4309226649887278062008-02-18T08:09:00.000+08:002008-02-18T08:09:00.000+08:00Further reply from Peter:Hi Henry,Exactly. I've no...Further reply from Peter:<BR/><BR/>Hi Henry,<BR/><BR/>Exactly. I've no doubt, either, about the knowledge and insight of people in MOFCOM. But compliance with these the DSB decision by China is pretty crucial to the whole system. The persistent foot-dragging of the US, especially, in complying with decisions (the Byrd amendment being only the worst example of several, as you know) is a significant threat. If China decides to do the same then the whole thing becomes 'soft'. <BR/><BR/>My guess from China's behavior up to now is that it will comply fairly promptly. I don't think anyone can complain much, so far, about China's record on meeting obligations (I'm much less confident that Russia will be as WTO-abiding once it is a Member). <BR/><BR/>But, of course, China probably has a lot of options to bring it's legislation into compliance with its obligations in the auto case. It might be much harder to comply if it loses the IP case.<BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/><BR/>PeterHenry Gao 高树超https://www.blogger.com/profile/14269117737303166784noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-168688852164897628.post-70700335998090573532008-02-17T23:12:00.000+08:002008-02-17T23:12:00.000+08:00Dear Peter,Thanks for your comment. I'm not sure i...Dear Peter,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your comment. I'm not sure if I'm the best person to give<BR/>an answer, but I guess the Chinese government will be just like others, i.e., making some noise at first, maybe even try to appeal to<BR/>the AB, but then grudgingly comply with the ruling in the end. So far<BR/>the MOFCOM has been very quiet on the issue: they only stated that<BR/>they are "carefully studying the Panel report", but some pundits have been making allegations that the ruling is "unfair to China". To be frank I don't see any unfairness at all: the law on the issue is very clear and China indeed has violated the law. It does not matter how much foreign cars China has imported or whether the intention of China's auto policy is to fight against tariff evasion or not. The interesting question, though, is whether China will pick up some of these "fairness" argument in its appeal. My guess is that the officials in charge of China's dispute settlement in the WTO probably have a much better understanding than the pundits so will not be using this argument, but the question is: who will the senior leadership listen to?<BR/><BR/>Best<BR/><BR/>HenryHenry Gao 高树超https://www.blogger.com/profile/14269117737303166784noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-168688852164897628.post-77236557474995878282008-02-16T05:26:00.000+08:002008-02-16T05:26:00.000+08:00Hi Henry,I don't know the answer to your question ...Hi Henry,<BR/><BR/>I don't know the answer to your question but I agree with your analysis. This is precisely the important point. Will be interesting to watch. I'm counting on you to suggest the answer, however :-)petergallagher.com.auhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09635336729917790189noreply@blogger.com