Zhang Jie: Weaken or disintegrate the World Trade Organization of Sino -U.S.

World Trade Organization.(Reuters)

The obvious logic is that if the WTO system and rules change new changes, only the developed national interest groups led by the United States are dominated by the United States, and it is branded everywhere.Great powers and major developing countries, especially the economic development interests and technological innovation needs of small countries, the WTO system will inevitably accelerate the failure and even disintegrate.

The strategic focus of the current Sino -US trade war game is gradually evolving and focusing on changes in the World Trade Organization (WTO) system and rules.In fact, the highest decision -making level in the United States has gradually pointed the focus of the Sino -US trade war.The US Trade Representative Office (USTR) reported to Congress in recent years on the report on China ’s commitment to fulfilling the entry into the WTO, all expressed the Andrdquo of the“ disappointed emotion andrdquo;Wrong andrdquo; strong accusations for decision.

However, China believes that it has seriously fulfilled the WTO -related obligations.The Chinese government released a white paper in 2011, announcing that the entry into the WTO is fulfilled.On June 28, 2018, the white paper "China and the World Trade Organization" was released to explain the situation of its commitment to fulfill its entry into the WTO.

The important thing is that from July 11th to 13th, 2018, the seventh China Trade Policy Council of WTO has generally affirmed China's performance and contribution, but also pointed out issues such as some countries to open the Chinese market and other issues.Focus on concerns.

Why are China and the United States' judgment on the issue of China's performance commitment commitment?The annual report submitted by the US government to Congress pointed out: And "is obvious that the conditions for supporting China to join the WTO in the United States are wrong.Now the rules of WTO are not enough to stop China's distorted market.

It can be seen that the United States mainly focuses on the Chinese government's various market policies and state -owned enterprise subsidies, intervening in various market distortions caused by microeconomic behaviors, and the unique development opportunities and additional internationals that the United States believes that Chinese companies have obtained from it.The competitive advantage is at least on the surface.

However, the biggest misunderstanding of the United States on the Chinese market economy is that from the perspective of China's development facts, the various industrial policies and state -owned enterprise subsidies of the Chinese government are essentially hindering the independent innovation of the Chinese joint -stock economic department and the private economic department.The ability, too fast, weakened the labor -intensive production cost advantage, and overall the inhibitory effect on the international competitive advantage of the Chinese manufacturing department.

Therefore, China's trade deficit with the United States is almost not the result of government intervention. On the contrary, the improvement of the Chinese market economy system and the reduction of distortions will fundamentally activate the motivation for innovation and entrepreneurship of microeconomics.The trade deficit between the United States.

In the last period, since the misjudgment of the Chinese government's intervention of micro -economic effects, and even based on this as an excuse, the United States has destroyed the core rules of the WTO on the grounds of domestic security and domestic law.Multi -game motivation.

The most fundamental factor is that with the adjustment of the economic structure of China and the United States and the increase in competitiveness, the US economic structure is adjusted and transformed by the development of the global financial system and technological innovation to develop advanced manufacturing., Transformation and upgrading of advanced manufacturing and autonomous controlled scientific and technological innovation capabilities. The mutual benefit and win -win economy has weakened the mutually beneficial and win -win economy, and the overlapping of direct competition in economic interests has increased.

This determines that the competitive factors of the economic development strategy between China and the United States are prominent, and it also determines the focus and core of the current trade war between China and the United States.

The trade war initiated by the United States has essentially caught a game dilemma that cannot be retreated.If the United States first retreats in the game of blackmailing China's interests, this means that the U.S.'s incredible threat effects in the future trade interest game with other countries in the future.On the contrary, China also has such a game dilemma.Therefore, this means that the rigid characteristics of the Sino -US trade war also requires the concession of the two sides at the same time.

Will the WTO be abandoned, destroyed and disintegrated?

Even though U.S. officials have repeatedly released the tone of the WTO.And the decisive force that dominates the direction of the WTO rules. Our basic judgment is that the WTO will not be easily abandoned, destroyed or even disintegrated, because:

First, it is difficult to find other global replacement public products.An basic logic that needs to be clarified is that WTO emphasizes Andrdquo; "mutual benefit and win -win andrdquo; common interests and tolerance benefits. On the contrary, it is difficult to accommodate the absolutely" peer -to -peer trade Andrdquo; and Andrdquo;It can't hold the so -called Andrdquo; or Andrdquo; or Andrdquo; the current WTO system and rules of the current WTO system and rules.The support point is to connect the free trade system of developed countries and developing countries, rather than a free trade system that only becomes trade and interests between developed countries. This is the core logic of the WTO rules that can produce and occur.The global value chain division of labor and trading system dominated by the product chain and industrial chain is a new trade system led by intermediate products.

The rise and expansion of the global value chain division of labor and trade systems mainly based on intermediate products can cause the global trading system to get rid of the past interests of the global trading system, or the central peripheral trading system of the benefit.Both can obtain trade and investment income from the global free trade system, prompting most countries in the world to generate confidence and determination to maintain and develop the WTO rules; another support point is that the WTO rules are essentially the compromise of the interests of the interests of developed countries and developing countries.Products, because most developed countries believe in relying on their own technical monopoly forces, brand marketing accumulation capabilities and global competitive advantages of multinational companies, can rely on the free trade system to obtain more trade and investment benefits from the growing markets of developing countries. This is bothIn the past, the main reasons for the active implementation of the free trade system was the core reason why most developed countries are still willing to maintain the WTO.

Second, no one can subvert the global economic mutual dependence.At the 2018 G20 conference, the United States tried to win Europe to form an Andrdquo; the intention of the common system to balance China was blocked.It is a considerable amount of intermediate products and innovation value in Japan and the European Union. Therefore, any behavior that restricts Chinese products exports is essentially limiting product exports of developed countries such as Japan and the European Union. On the other hand, even between developed countries, due to developed countries, due to developed countriesIn the differences and gaps of core technology innovation capabilities, it is difficult for Japan and the European Union to completely offset the huge pressure of "U.S. preferred Andrdquo.

You need to re -understand the value of the WTO.In fact, WTO has evolved into the cornerstone of economic and industrial mutual dependence systems between developed countries and developed countries, developed countries, and developing countries.The objective fact is that the trade, investment and industrial interdependence systems formed by the depending on the WTO rules system determine that no country can be completely independent in any country or the field of product chain, so as not to rely on any country;There is no country that can rely on its own technological innovation absolute advantage and monopoly position to have complete control over a certain industrial chain or product chain.

The objective fact is that even if major countries in the world enter

The objective fact is that even if major countries around the world have entered the competitive state of scientific and technological innovation and high -end manufacturing, it is difficult to eliminate mutual dependence relationships in the global scientific and technological innovation system, and it is difficult to exclude mutual dependence between the global high -end manufacturing system.

Third, fundamentally does not meet the long -term interests of the United States.The economic structural adjustment dominated by the United States' re -industrialization, as well as whether the economic stable growth target of the creation of white manufacturing jobs can be achieved, fundamentally, depends on the further market opening of other developed countries to American products, and it depends on the more depending on the market opening of the United States, and it depends on it.The continuously growing markets of Chinese and other emerging countries and developing countries to American products.On the contrary, the relatively limited opportunities of the US market growth and the manufacturing product market caused by the return of the manufacturing industry is strongly exclusive, but the accommodation of products of other developed countries, emerging countries and developing countries is decreasing.

In essence, even if the United States, Japan and Europe have reached Andrdquo; Economic Alliance of "Zero Tariffs andrdquo.China's growth market, and the market demand space of emerging countries and developing countries to developed countries led by the United States has been greatly squeezed.

The asymmetry of this market capacity and market opportunities has led to the United States if the United States abandon the WTO system and rules, which essentially means that the United States exclude itself from the market opportunities of emerging countries and developing countries.It is limited to the US's own economic development opportunities and space for trade benefits.

Who can dominate the new changes of the WTO rules?

At present, the United States and Europe are trying and working hard to reach Andrdquo's bilateral trading system, and promise to promote the reform of the WTO system and rules.Gradually evolved into the new situation and new pattern of an important game force in the global economic system, who can lead the change of the WTO system and rules?

The current globalization seems to be gradually evolving into a game of three forces. And "The United States prioritize the globalization dominated by Andrdquo; logic, and the free trade system dominated by developed countries such as Japan and Europe, which is dominated by the interests of developed countries.And as the largest development of the country's Andmdash; Andmdash; the "Belt and Road Andrdquo; and the globalization of the" Belt and Road Andrdquo; and the comprehensive cooperation between China and Africa is in line with the interests of most developing countries.In fact, it is easier to be ignored. At the same time, it is the most important force. It is the globalization of emerging countries such as India, Brazil, Russia, and many emerging small countries and developing countries.

Is it incorporated into more developed countries' economic development and technological innovation demands?Or should we include more demands for development opportunities and development benefits in developing countries?This will be the fundamental differences and game focus of changes in the WTO system and rules in the future.The connotation of the Sino -US trade war and economic development strategic competition is not just the so -called institutional competition of these two countries.Essence

Therefore, in this sense, it is bound to be the common interests of emerging countries and many developing countries, and it is more likely to determine the future change direction of the WTO system and rules.

The objective fact is that if it is in accordance with the demands of most developed countries, decide and lead the future change direction of the future change of the WTO system and rules. The inevitable consequences are on the one hand, accompanied by the general and generally of developing countries on their own development opportunities and development benefits."Awakening andrdquo; in a high probability, it will lead to the current global value chain division of labor and trade system, to regional value chain division of labor and trading system, and the general occurrence of the national value chain division of labor and trade system.The reinforcement of the group of developing countries, as well as the two opposing camps of developed countries and developing countries, has led to the acceleration and disintegration of the WTO system.

On the other hand, the objective fact that to correctly recognize is that even if developed countries can achieve "Tariffs completely exempted Andrdquo; developed countries and emerging countries, and many developing countries can achieve" all tariffs free of tariffs freeAndrdquo;?Moreover, the various technical and trade barriers that developed countries usually use behind them have already exceeded the effect of tariff barriers. Can developing countries be able to do high -level openness of Andrdquo;

If you insist on imposing the rules of over marketization to emerging countries and developing countries, this obviously has exceeded the economic development stage of emerging countries and many developing countries.

Therefore, the adjustment direction of the WTO rules cannot just satisfy Andrdquo; logic in the United States, and it is also impossible to accommodate the so -called absolute fair trade or peer -to -peer logic. The only correct direction of adjustment and reform is still emphasizing diversity,Differences and moderate balance, highlight the tolerance of development opportunities and development benefits in developing countries.

(The author is a researcher at the National Development and Strategy Research Institute of Renmin University of China, a professor at the Chinese Institute of Economic Reform and Development of Renmin University of China)