In fact, in March, China and the United States had two informal exchanges on the 301 survey at the WTO meeting of the board of goods Trade Council (GoodsCouncil) and the monthly DSB meeting, which was included in other matters (otherbusiness) in the conference minutes. This time, the first financial reporter saw only a member of the agenda from close to WTO related people. The issue was fifth of the formal plan of the day. In addition, the problem of selecting members of the long drawn appellate body was included in the tenth. The summit of the Ministry of Commerce, Chinas spokesman, said at a regular press conference on the 26 day that there were two main issues related to the Chinese side, including the selection of members of the appellate body. A senior observer, who was close to the Sino US negotiations, told the first financial reporter that at this DSB meeting, China and the United States were expected to have a confrontation on the issue of the use of clause 301. For two times, China and the United States will formally fight against the 301 investigation. Since Trump signed the memorandum in March 23rd, citing the results of the 301 survey, it announced that it would impose a large scale tariff on Chinese imports, and to limit the Sino US investment mergers and acquisitions. In April 4th, China proposed a consultations request under the WTO dispute settlement mechanism under the WTO dispute settlement mechanism of the United States to China, and officially launched the WTO dispute settlement procedure. In response to the 27 day battle, insiders told the first financial reporter that the outside world was highly concerned about the reaction of the United States after its formal expression. The previous senior observers said that the issues included in the multilateral conference were only the parties positions, and that real negotiations could only be carried out between the bilateral or the small members, and if they were not included in the formal agenda, there was no time for discussion under other matters. Peak said that the United States 301 investigation, China will follow WTO dispute settlement rules to promote related cases. It also calls on the US side to take practical action, abandon unilateralism and trade protectionism, respect the rules of the WTO and resolve differences through equal dialogue and consultation on the basis of mutual respect, and push bilateral economic and trade relations to a stable distance. According to the meeting minutes released on WTO website, in March 23rd, Zhang Xiangchen, the permanent WTO delegation of China, proposed that the 301 investigation should be included in the Council of trade in goods. At a meeting in March 26th, he appealed to WTO members to work together to prevent the 301 investigation from Revival and to shut it in the cage of WTO rules. He said the attempt to impose restrictions on China on the basis of the 301 survey results from the unilateral implementation of the United States violated the WTO commitments made by the United States in the United States and the relevant decisions and regulations of the WTO. In accordance with the WTO ruling and the United States commitment, the United States can not determine whether the practice of other members violates the WTO rules through the 301 investigation unilaterally, and in dealing with matters relating to the WTO agreement, the United States is subject to the ruling of the WTO rules and dispute settlement bodies. At that time, the US representative said the United States would not comment, because it was only under the March 23rd Meeting that the issue was included in other matters, and he turned other members to the United States Trade Representative Office website to see the information about the 301 terms of action. People bring billions of losses per year. In March 27th, the first financial reporter learned from relevant sources that Yu Benlin, Minister of Chinese permanent mission to WTO, raised the topic again at the DSB meeting. He pointed out that the contents of article 301~310 of the 1974 trade act of the United States are usually referred to as clause 301, which authorizes the United States government to make unilateral decisions in the presence of trade disputes with other countries and to take unilateral measures that do not exist in the WTO procedure. The legality of the above measures has been brought to the WTO by the European Union (EU predecessor) before (DS152). 18 years later, the United States took the initiative in March 22nd this year against its solemn commitment, which we are deeply concerned about. Yu Benlin said. He introduced that in January 2000, the WTO dispute settlement body adopted the report of the panel of experts on the 301 clause of the European Union v. the United States. In this case, the expert group clearly pointed out that if the US government negates or withdraws these commitments to any extent, the United States will assume state responsibility. In the case, the United States has made a commitment in a clear, formal, re and unconditional way, that is, USTR will only be determined according to the DSB ruling. This time, the US representative continued to have no positive response and attacked Chinas trade policy. He suggested that the United States is ready to discuss with China the distorted China trade policy targeted at the 301 survey. It is noteworthy that the traditional allies of the United States, the European Union and Japan, are at the two meeting. For the first time, Japan and the European Union said that although they agreed that the United States urged other countries to protect intellectual property more strongly, any trade policy needed to be consistent with the WTO agreement; the second time, Japan reexpressed the same position. Selection of members of the Appellate Body for inclusion in the agenda It is a matter of concern that the problem of the selection of members of the appellate body has been put on the agenda again. At the summit, on the selection of members of the appellate body, the Chinese side, with the other 64 members, will continue to call for the immediate start of the selection procedure for the members of the WTO appellate body to fill the three vacancies as soon as possible. Since last year, on the grounds of some so-called institutional concerns, individual members have been committed to obstructing the selection process, which has resulted in only 4 members of the appellate body. If the problem is not solved, it will affect the normal operation of the appellate body and the dispute settlement mechanism and damage the WTO and the multilateral trading system. The above agenda shows that the appointment is made by 42 members from Argentina, China and Australia. The United States has blocked the appointment of judges of the WTO appellate body since July last year, which is known as the world trade Supreme Court. In December 11th last year, the European Court of justice of the appellate body was full, and the United States had been blocking the appointment of its successor. The appellate body should have seven members, but the current 3 vacancies have exacerbated the backlog of the case, thereby weakening the credibility of WTO as a trade dispute mediator. The Doha round of multilateral trade negotiations, which was scheduled to fully end negotiations before January 1, 2005, has been dragged down for a long time. For many years, the most authoritative and effective part of the WTO is the dispute settlement mechanism. Philip Navia, Professor of Chilean International Research Institute, told the first financial reporter that the state of WTO is close to a halt. In his view, if this part is paralyzed, even if the whole WTO is alive, it will be like brain death. However, the continued participation of the United States in multilateral mechanisms also means that the Trump administration does not have to withdraw from WTO as previously known. Li Yihong, the deputy director of the World Trade Department of the Ministry of Commerce of China, told the first financial reporter that the United States had largely attended all the related meetings, although there was not much sound on some difficult issues. The United States has a number of speeches on some of the negotiations, including the United States before the eleventh session of the Ministerial Conference (MC11), especially in the recent national security strategy report issued at the end of last year by the United States, including the position that the multilateral trading system, including some international organizations, should take. In other words, the withdrawal of WTO from the United States may continue to be a hypothesis. From the agenda, the remaining items, in addition to the usual practice, consider and implement the recommendations adopted by the DSB, almost all of the specific measures of anti-dumping and countervailing measures that are concerned by the members. For example, in response to the anti-dumping and countervailing duties imposed by the United States on some products, South Korea proposed the establishment of a group. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) decision making body, the international monetary and financial committee, concluded its thirty-seventh Ministerial Conference in Washington on 21. WTO director general Azevedo said in a written statement to the conference on the same day that global cooperation is very important to mitigate trade tensions and maintain strong economic growth, and WTO can play a role in it. He said that if current trade frictions continue to escalate, the world may usher in a series of unilateral and tit for tat trade measures, which will add uncertainty to the global economic and trade growth. The source of this article: a financial editor: Ji Xue Ying _NN6784 From the agenda, the remaining items, in addition to the usual practice, consider and implement the recommendations adopted by the DSB, almost all of the specific measures of anti-dumping and countervailing measures that are concerned by the members. For example, in response to the anti-dumping and countervailing duties imposed by the United States on some products, South Korea proposed the establishment of a group. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) decision making body, the international monetary and financial committee, concluded its thirty-seventh Ministerial Conference in Washington on 21. WTO director general Azevedo said in a written statement to the conference on the same day that global cooperation is very important to mitigate trade tensions and maintain strong economic growth, and WTO can play a role in it. He said that if current trade frictions continue to escalate, the world may usher in a series of unilateral and tit for tat trade measures, which will add uncertainty to the global economic and trade growth.