Wednesday 31 December 2008

China's new policy on Taiwan

There are several interesting points in the statement made by Chinese President Hu Jintao at an event commemorating the 30th anniversary of the publication of "Message to Compatriots in Taiwan" held in Beijing today:

1. The possibility of some sort of Economic Cooperation Agreement, or free-trade agreement, between China and Taiwan,
2. Taiwan could participate in international organizations "with reasonable arrangements made upon practical consultations between China and Taiwan". No wonder China softened its stance at the WTO earlier with regard to the GPA and candidacy of Taiwanese officials in WTO committees.
3. The two sides should end the state of hostility and reach peace agreements and "try to avoid war between brothers". This has not eliminated the possibility of taking Taiwan by force, but the position of China has been greatly softened from earlier stances.

告台胞书发表30周年 胡锦涛提出"六点"

(2008-12-31)

http://zaobao.com/special/newspapers/2008/12/others081231z.shtml

  来源:中评社

  纪念《告台湾同胞书》发表30周年座谈会31日上午在北京人民大会堂举行,中共中央总书记、国家主席、中央军委主席胡锦涛出席座谈会并发表重要讲话。中共中央政治局常委、全国人大常委会委员长吴邦国主持座谈会,中共中央政治局常委、全国政协主席贾庆林出席。

  胡锦涛发表讲话说,明天是2009年元旦,在这里我谨代表祖国大陆各族人民,向广大的台湾同胞致以诚挚的问候和衷心的祝福。1979年 元旦全国人民代表大会常委委员会发表《告台湾同胞书》,郑重宣誓了争取祖国和平统一的大政方针,两岸关系发展由此揭开了新的历史篇章。《告台湾同胞书》明 确提出,实现中国的统一,是人心所向,大势所趋,一定要考虑现实情况,完成祖国统一的大业,在解决统一问题时,尊重台湾现状和台湾各界人士的意见,采取合 情合理的政策和办法,不使台湾人民蒙受损失。《告台湾同胞书》明确提出,我们寄希望于台湾人民,也寄希望于台湾当局,《告台湾同胞书》明确倡议,通过商谈 结束台湾海峡军事对峙状态,撤除阻隔两岸同胞交往的藩篱,推动自由往来,实现通航、通邮、通商,开展经济文化交流,《告台湾同胞书》的发表标志着我们解决 台湾问题的理论和实践进入了一个新的历史时期。

  胡锦涛指出,自1949年台湾问题形成以来,我们始终把解决台湾问题,完成祖国统一大业作为自己的神圣职责,进行了长期不懈的努力。1978年党的十一届三中全会作出把党和国家工作中心转移到经济建设上来,实行改革开放的历史性决策,中国的发展从此进入历史新时期。

  胡锦涛说,《告台湾同胞书》就是在这样一个重要历史背景下发表的,30年来我们为促进台湾问题的解决提出了一系列对台方针政策。邓小平 同志根据国际国内形势发展变化,从中华民族根本利益和国家发展战略全局出发,在毛泽东同志、周恩来同志关于争取和平解决台湾问题思想的基础上创造性的提出 "一国两制 "伟大构想,为确立"和平统一、一国两制"的方针作出了历史性贡献。江泽民同志提出现阶段发展两岸关系,推进祖国和平统一进程的八项主张,丰富和发展了对 台方针政策,党的十六大以来,我们就对台工作做出重大决策部署,提出一系列新主张,新举措,赋予对台方针政策新的内涵,《反分裂国家法》的制定和实施,把 我们关于解决台湾问题的大政方针法律化,表达了我们坚持和平统一的一贯立场和最大诚意,同时表明了全中国人民坚决反对台独,捍卫国家主权和领土完整的共同 意志和坚定决心。《告台湾同胞书》发表以来,在两岸同胞和各界人士的共同努力下两岸关系发生重大变化,1987年底两岸同胞长期隔绝状态被打破,两岸同胞 交往日益密切,两岸经济合作蓬勃发展,形成互补、互利的格局,1992年两岸达成"九二共识",双方在此基础上举行首次"汪辜会谈",2005年国共两党 领导人实现历史性会谈,达成《两岸和平发展共同愿景》。

  胡锦涛指出,今年3月台湾局势发生积极变化,两岸关系迎来难得历史机遇,5月以来,本着建立互信、搁置争议、求同存异、共创双赢的精 神,两岸协商在"九二共识"的基础上得到恢复,并取得重要成果,两岸全面直击,双向三通迈出历史性步伐,双方妥善处理一系列问题,保持两岸关系改善和发展 势头,推动两岸关系展现出和平发展的前景。今天两岸同胞往来之频繁,经济联系之密切,文化交流之活跃,共同利益之广泛是前所未有的,中国人民维护台海和 平,推动两岸关系发展,实现祖国和平统一的事业,日益赢得国际社会理解和支持,世界各国普遍承认一个中国的格局不断巩固和发展。

  胡锦涛说,30年来两岸关系发展的实践告诉我们,推动两岸关系发展,实现祖国和平统一最重要的是要遵循"和平统一、一国两制的方针" 和现阶段发展两岸关系推进祖国和平统一进程的八项主张,坚持"一个中国"的原则绝不动摇,争取和平统一的努力绝不放弃,贯彻寄希望于希望台湾人民的方针绝 不改变,反对台独分裂活动绝不妥协,牢牢把握两岸关系和平、发展的主题,真诚为两岸同胞谋福祉,为台海地区谋和平,维护国家主权和领土完整,维护中华民族 根本利益,30年的实践充分证明我们制定和实施的对台工作大政方针顺应了时代潮流和历史的趋势,把握了民族根本利益和国家核心利益,体现了尊重历史、尊重 现实、尊重人民愿望的实事求是精神,反应了对两岸关系发展规律的深刻认识,从而推动两岸关系发展取得了历史性成就。

  胡锦涛强调,我们要继续长期坚持和全面贯彻这些被实践证明是正确的大政方针,继续推动祖国和平统一进程不断向前迈进,30年的实践充 分证明,祖国大陆改革开放和现代化建设不断取得巨大进步,是推动两岸关系发展,实现祖国和平统一的雄厚基础和可靠保障,决定了两岸关系的基本格局和发展方 向。30年的实践充分证明,海峡两岸中国人有能力、有智慧把两岸关系的前途掌握在自己手中,通过交流合作增进感情融合,增加共同利益,通过协商谈判,积累 共识,减少分歧、循序渐进解决问题,30年的实践还充分证明台独分裂势力及其分裂活动违背两岸同胞共同利益,损害中华民族根本利益,中国不可阻挡的历史潮 流,是对两岸关系和平发展的最大威胁,必然遭到两岸同胞共同反对,任何人,任何势力把台湾从中国分割出去的企图都是注定要失败的。

  胡锦涛说,经过30年的改革开放中国的面貌发生了历史性变化,中国同世界的关系发生了历史性变化,两岸关系历经风雨坎坷,也站在了新 的历史起点上,回顾近代民族之艰难奋斗历程,展望未来民族之光明发展前景,我们应该登高望远,审时度势,本着对历史、对人民负责的态度,站在全民族发展的 高度,以更远大的目光,更丰富的智慧,更坚毅的勇气,更务实的思路,认真思考和务实解决两岸关系发展的重大问题。解决台湾问题的核心是实现祖国统一,目的 是维护和确保国家主权和领土完整,追求包括台湾同胞在内的全体中华儿女的幸福,实现中华民族伟大复兴,以和平方式实现祖国统一最符合包括台湾同胞在内的中 华民族根本利益,也符合求和平、谋发展、促合作的时代潮流,我们一定要以最大诚意尽最大努力,争取祖国和平统一。

  胡锦涛指出,首先要确保两岸关系和平发展,这有利于两岸同胞加强交流合作,融洽感情,有利于两岸积累互信,解决争议,有利于两岸经济 共同发展,共同繁荣。有利于维护国家主权和领土完整,实现中华民族伟大复兴。为此我们要牢牢把握两岸关系和平发展的主题,积极推动两岸关系和平发展,实现 全民族的团结、和谐、昌盛,我们应该把坚持大陆和台湾同属一个中国,作为推动两岸关系和平发展的政治基础,把深化交流合作,推进协商谈判作为推动两岸关系 和平发展的重要途径,把促进两岸同胞团结奋斗,作为推动两岸关系和平发展的强大动力,携手共进,戮力同心,努力开创两岸关系和平发展新局面,以恪守"一个 中国",增进政治互信,维护国家主权和领土完整是国家核心利益,世界上只有一个中国,中国主权和领土完整不容分割,1949年以来大陆和台湾尽管尚未统 一,但不是中国领土和主权的分裂,而是上个世纪40年代中后期中国内战遗留并延续的政治对立,这没有改变大陆和台湾同属一个中国的事实,两岸终归统一,不 是主权和领土再造,而是结束政治对立,两岸在事关维护一个中国框架这一原则问题上形成共同认知和一致立场,就有了各族政治互信的基础,什么事情都好商量, 两岸应该本着建设性态度积极面向未来,共同努力创造条件,通过平等协商逐步解决两岸关系中历史遗留的问题和发展过程中产生的新问题。

  继续反对台独分裂活动是推动两岸关系和平发展的必要条件,是两岸同胞的共同责任,凡是有利于两岸关系和平发展的事,都应该大力推动,凡是破坏两岸关系和平发展的事都必须坚决反对。

  第二,推进经济合作,促进共同发展。两岸同胞要开展经济大合作,扩大两岸直接三通,后置共同利益,形成紧密联系,实现互利双赢,我们继 续欢迎并支持台湾企业到大陆经营发展,鼓励和支持有条件的大陆企业到台湾投资兴业,我们期待实现两岸经济关系正常化,推动经济合作制度化,为两岸关系和平 发展奠定更为扎实的物质基础,提供更为强大的经济动力,两岸可以维持签订综合性经济合作协议,建立具有两岸特色的经济合作机制,以最大限度实现优势互补, 互惠互利,建立更加紧密的两岸经济合作机制进程,有利于台湾经济提升竞争力和扩大发展空间,有利于两岸经济共同发展,有利于探讨两岸经济共同发展同亚太区 域经济合作机制相衔接的可行途径。

  第三,弘扬中华文化,加强精神纽带。中华文化源远流长,瑰丽灿烂,是两岸同胞共同的宝贵财富,是维系两岸同胞民族感情的重要纽带,中 华文化在台湾根深衣茂,台湾文化丰富了中华文化的内涵,台湾同胞爱乡爱土的台湾意识不等于台独意识,两岸同胞要共同继承和弘扬中华文化优秀传统,开展各种 形式的合作交流,使中华文化星火相传,发扬光大,以增强民族意识,凝聚共同意志,形成共谋中华民族伟大复兴的精神力量。尤其要加强两岸青少年交流,不断为 两岸关系和平发展增添蓬勃活力,我们将继续采取积极措施,包括愿意协商两岸文化教育交流协议,推动两岸文化教育交流合作,迈上范围更广、层次更高的新台 阶。

  第四,加强人员往来扩大各界交流,两岸同胞要扩大交流,两岸各界及其代表性人士要扩大交流,加强善意沟通,增进相互了解,对于任何有 利于推动两岸关系和平发展的建设性意见我们都愿意作出积极回应,我们将继续推动国共两岸交流对话,共同落实两岸和平发展共同愿景,对于部分台湾同胞由于各 种原因对祖国大陆缺乏了解,甚至存在误解,对发展两岸关系持有疑虑,我们不仅愿意以最大的包容和耐心加以化解和疏导,而且愿意采取更加积极的措施让越来越 多的台湾同胞在推动两岸关系和平发展中增进福祉。

  胡锦涛特别指出,对于那些曾经主张过、从事过,追随过台独的人我们也热忱欢迎他们回到推动两岸关系和平发展的正确方向上来,我们希望民进党认清时势停止台独分裂活动,不要在与全民族的共同意愿背道而驰,只要民进党改变台独分裂立场,我们愿意作出正面回应。

  第五,维护国家主权协商涉外事务,我们一贯致力于维护台湾同胞在国外的正当权益,我们驻外使领馆要加强台湾同胞的协议,我们了解台湾同 胞对参与国际活动问题的感受,重视解决与之相关的问题,两岸在涉外事务中避免不必要的内讧有利于增进中华民族整体利益,对于台湾同外国开展民间性经济文化 往来的前景可以进一步协商,对于台湾参与国际组织活动问题,在不造成"两个中国","一中一台"的前提下可以通过两岸的务实协商作出合情合理的安排,解决 台湾问题,实现国家完全统一是中国内部事务,不受任何外国势力干涉。

  第六,结束敌对状态,达成和平协议,海峡两岸中国人有责任共同终极两岸敌对的历史,极力避免再出现骨肉同胞兵戎相见,让子孙后代在和平环境中携手创造美好生活。

  胡锦涛说,为有利于两岸协商谈判,对彼此往来作出安排,两岸可以就在国家尚未统一的特殊情况下的政治关系展开务实探讨,为有利于稳定台 海局势,减轻军事安全顾虑,两岸可以就军事问题进行接触、交流,探讨建立军事安全互信机制问题。我们再一次呼吁在"一个中国"原则的基础上,协商正式结束 两岸敌对状态达成和平协议,构建两岸关系和平发展框架。两岸同胞是血脉相连的命运共同体,包括大陆和台湾在内的中国是两岸同胞的共同家园,两岸同胞有责任 把它维护好建设好,实现中华民族伟大复兴要靠两岸同胞共同奋斗,两岸关系和平发展新局面,要靠两岸同胞共同开创,两岸关系和平发展成果由两岸同胞共同享 有,我们要坚持以人为本,把寄希望于台湾人民方针贯彻到各项对台工作中去,理解、信赖、关心台湾同胞,体察他们的意愿,了解他们的诉求,为他们排忧解难, 满腔热情,为台湾同胞多办好事和多办实事,依法保护台湾同胞正当权益,最广泛的团结台湾同胞一道推动两岸关系和平发展,台湾的前途系于两岸关系和平发展, 系于中华民族伟大复兴,在推动两岸关系和平发展,实现中华民族伟大复兴的道路上台湾同胞将同大陆同胞一道共享一个伟大国家的尊严和荣耀,以做堂堂正正的中 国人骄傲和自豪。

  胡锦涛也提到,长期以来广大香港同胞、澳门同胞和海外侨胞心系祖国统一大业,是反独促统的重要力量,我们衷心的希望香港同胞、台湾同 胞、海外侨胞为推动两岸关系和平发展,实现和祖国平统一作出新的贡献。多年来国际社会对中国政府和中国人民维护台海和平,推动两岸关系发展,实现国家完全 统一的事业给予了积极支持,中国政府对此表示赞赏和感谢。中国的统一不会损害任何国家的利益,只会促进亚太地区和世界繁荣稳定,只会有利于中国人民为人类 和平与发展的崇高事业作出新的更大的贡献。

  胡锦涛最后指出,两岸统一是中华民族走向伟大复兴的历史必然,尽管前进道路上还会出现困难和阻碍,但只要我们坚定信心,不懈努力,紧紧依靠两岸同胞就一定能够开创两岸关系和平发展新局面,迎来中华民族伟大复兴的锦绣前程。

  座谈会上,全国人大常委会副委员长兼秘书长李建国,全国政协副主席、台湾民主自治同盟中央主席林文漪,中华全国学生联合会主席刘凯,中共中央台湾工作办公室、国务院台湾事务办公室主任王毅先后发言。

  中央党政军群有关部门和北京市负责同志,各民主党派中央、全国工商联负责人以及各界代表等出席了座谈会。

Tuesday 23 December 2008

China's reaction to the subsidy case

Commenting on the recent case brought by the US against China on famous brands subsidies, Mr. Xiankun LU, Counsellor in the WTO mission of China, stated, "Such complaints are very normal between WTO members. We'd bring a complaint too if we were facing similar problems. Thus, it's hard to say whether this would have any impact on US-China trade. It would not have any impact on any other subsidies measures either." (emphasis added)

Indeed, China requested for the panel in another case against US CVD practices the same day.

按WTO规则处理美出口补贴起诉

http://www.sina.com.cn  2008年12月23日 02:57  每日经济新闻
◆每经记者 江旋 发自北京

    昨日,商务部条法司负责人就美国和墨西哥要求终止中国对知名品牌的补贴措施表示,中方一贯尊重世贸组织规则,反对贸易保护主义,对美墨的磋商请求,中方将按照世贸组织规则予以处理。

    中国驻WTO代表团参赞卢先�表示,从19日开始的10之内中方会向美墨答复,确定磋商时间。按照世贸组织争端解决程序,磋商期一般为60天。

    "这类申诉在WTO成员之间是很正常,我们如果遇到这样的问题也会提起申诉。所以,很难说会对中美贸易产生什么影响,"卢先�说,"对其他的补贴措施也不会产生影响。

The Great Subsidy War is Coming?

On Dec 22nd, China requested the establishment of the panel in the case against US AD & CVD duties on certain products (steel pipe, tires, etc.). This is the third case China has brought against the US and the 2nd case China brought against US CVD practices. There are several interesting issues in this case:

1. The request for the panel was made only a few days after the US brought a case against Chinese export subsidies. As the US itself has been providing various loans lately to private firms, one wonders whether this would set off the trigger for a global war on subsidies (and/or CVDs) ? To be more specific, one wonders whether China would bring a case against US subsidies (rather than CVD practices) any time soon?

2. In its panel request, Chin also alleged that the US breached Art. 15(b) of the Accession Protocol of China, which sanctions the application of the "alternative benchmark" approach in CVD investigations against China. According to China, the US breached this provision by failing to make a finding of "special difficulties" before resorting to the "alternative benchmark" approach. The interesting legal question here is: does the Accession Protocol create legal obligations for China only, or does it create legal obligations for other WTO members as well?

Saturday 20 December 2008

New wine in old bottle

At the TNC meeting on 17 December, the last one in 2008, DG Lamy raised some interesting points in his speech. Some of the key issues are highlighted below, which my comments in brackets.

On the wider WTO front, I would like to put forward three elements for your consideration, which also stem from our discussions since Friday:

First, I believe that the WTO has a particular responsibility to follow up on the trade measures which been taken in the wake of the financial crisis; you all know that I have set up an internal Task Force to produce regular updates of these measures so that we have a better sense of the trade consequences of the financial crisis.

(HG: These measures include export restrictions on agricultural products, rescue packages that could be challenged as illegal subsidies, etc. Some of these are discussed in an article by Aaditya Mattoo and Arvind Subramanian in the next issue of the Foreign Affairs)

I am ready to report to you periodically on developments on that front in writing, as suggested by Egypt on behalf of the Arab Group and by Japan, also with the support of a number of other Members. My first report could come already this week.

I also believe it would be useful to provide a forum where this WTO radar picture could be discussed collectively; I do not think we need to reinvent the wheel so we could use one of the existing forums in the house to this effect: the Trade Policy Review Body. I have discussed this with the Chair of the TPRB, Ambassador Agah of Nigeria, and he is agreeable to this. We will be looking into a date during the second part of January when a first review among Members could be held on the basis of this radar picture.

(HG: There has been some talks to create a so-called "Bretton Woods II". I don't think that is necessary. While the Bretton Woods institutions surely have their shares in creating the mess we are in today, the main reason for the trouble is not because the existing rules or institutions are insufficient. Instead, it was exactly because the institutions did not do what they are supposed to do and we did not follow the rules that we are in the trouble today.)

Second, I believe we need to keep reviewing developments in the area of trade finance where the WTO early interventions have been useful in mobilising resources for this important area; trade finance is an area which seriously impacts trade flows for developing countries and we should remain vigilant and active.

Third, I believe we need to have a clear roadmap for work on Aid for Trade in 2009, culminating with the second Global Review before the summer break. We need to keep the focus on mainstreaming trade into Members' development policies and we also need to keep pressure on the mobilization of funds, which has been reasonably successful but where more could be done, in particular in view of the current financial crisis.

Looking into 2009, some of you have mentioned your desire to brainstorm over issues which are beyond the scope of the negotiations but which relate to areas interfacing the WTO. I agree with this. The only point I would make is that this may be a useful exercise, provided it does not distract us from our main objective of advancing the Round. I suggest we come back to this in the General Council sometime at the beginning of 2009.

(HG: Does this mean the resurrection of the debate on competition, labour and environment? Some of these have been explicitly rejected by the membership before. Is this the right time to revive talks on these issues? I'm not so confident)

A final point: in the New Year we will also have to discuss the next WTO Ministerial Conference, by which I mean our regular mandated Ministerial Conference; my own sense is that this need not be the big jamboree we have seen in the past, but rather a venue where Members take a strategic look at the future and steps to advance the goals of the organisation. On this issue, the General Council Chairman will consult with Members to get their views and take this forward.

(HG: Good for the WTO: ever since the HK Ministerial 3 years ago, the WTO has not had a ministerial conference. This is a breach of Art IV.1 in the, but the question is who has the standing to sue the WTO on this.

As I've said before, one problem with WTO MCs is that there is too much media attention, and nobody can really work well under spotlight. It's good to know that the DG also prefers low-profile MCs over the noisy carnivals in the past. )

In sum, while the year may end in disappointment, we should now gather ourselves and work in 2009 to demonstrate that the WTO remains as necessary and credible as ever. The world trading system needs the Doha Round to better respond to the needs and aspirations of its Members. Concluding the Round should remain our focus in 2009. But this endeavour takes place within a more global portfolio of WTO activities in which we need to keep investing. This task starts today.

From textiles to peanuts

On Friday, the USTR filed another WTO case against China concerning China's "Famous Brands" programs. According to the Consultation Request, the Chinese programs allegedly violate the SCM Agreement, the Ag Agreement, and the NT obligation under GATT Art. III.

In the press release, USTR Susan Schwab announced that the reason to take this case was because "
we were disturbed to find that China still appears to be using WTO-illegal measures to promote its exports, ranging from textiles and refrigerators to beer and peanuts. We are going to the WTO today because we are determined to use all resources available to fight industrial policies that aim to unfairly promote Chinese branded products at the expense of American workers, farmers, ranchers, manufacturers and intellectual property owners". Of course this case is not about peanuts, even though China happens to be the largest exporter on this. The more likely cause is textiles, as US textile firms try to find other ways to fight the onslaught of Chinese exports ahead of the expiration of the Special Textile Safeguard at the end of this year.

Interestingly, Sanlu is also on the 2005 list of "famous brands" in China. Moreover, the website of the China Promotion Committee for Top Brand Strategy even provides detailed instructions on how to distinguish some "famous brands" Chinese dairy products, including milk powder made by Sanlu, from the fake ones. Now it seems the best way might be testing the melamine levels of the products concerned.

Friday 19 December 2008

Taking down the pirates

The UN Security Council recently approved a resolution allowing foreign military forces to go after pirates on land in Somalia. In case anyone was thinking this is something new, the FDA has already opened an office in Beijing a month ago. While the stated goal of the new office, the first foreign office of the FDA, is to ensure food safety and protect consumers, the responsibilities of the office also include detecting counterfeit/pirated drugs. It seems that piracy is not that far away from you and me, and China is not that remote from Somalia after all.

Wednesday 17 December 2008

The scapegoating game continues

In an interesting recent article, Paul Blustein, Journalist in Residence at The Brookings Institution provides a behind-the-scenes account on what really happened during the ill-fated WTO Ministerial this July. It seems that it was not really fair to blame it on China. Instead, China's biggest neighbour (in terms of population) and the US seems to be the one who were responsible.

Tuesday 16 December 2008

Merry Christmas to China - from Geneva

The AB report for the Auto Parts case has just been released to the
public. Not surprisingly, the AB affirmed the Panel on almost all
accounts. However, by refusing to affirm the panel on the Art. II.1
claims, the AB has left a huge loophole in the future implementation
of the AB ruling. It is interesting to see whether China will try to
exploit this loophole when the time comes for enforcement.