On the issue of "Multi -Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement" (MPIA) issues under the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Japanese cabinet made the latest statement saying that it has notified the WTO intention to join MPIA.The advocacy and initiative have extended a positive welcome. After all, for MPIA, the continuous expansion of the "circle of friends" can undoubtedly resurrect the heating up as soon as possible for the frozen WTO dispute resolution mechanism for many years.

WTO, which is regarded as the "Economic United Nations", currently absorbs 164 member states, and more than 20 members are queuing up to join.In addition to continuous expansion, WTO has also precipitated the three core functions of formulating international multilateral trade rules, organizing multilateral trade negotiations, and resolving trade disputes between members in the past 28 years.As of now, the World Trade Organization dispute settlement mechanism (DSB) has successfully resolved nearly 600 trade disputes among members of members, and effectively maintains the stability and predictability of the international trade environment.

DSB is created with the establishment of the WTO. The dual trial system for the resolution of trade disputes is the preliminary trial of the first instance.The expert group in charge of the first instance is generally composed of three. They randomly extract from a qualified candidate's list of qualified candidates, and the appealing agency responsible for the final trial is also composed of at least three judges. The team members can only come from DSB permanent judges.EssenceIn addition, the DSB appealing agencies generally have seven regular judges. Each judge has a term of four years and can be re -elected for one session; and the principle of consistent principles of DSB permanent judges' selection and execution consultation.EssenceWhen encountering the vacancies of the judge of an appealing agency, the member states are re -elected by negotiating.

Different from the dispute settlement mechanism of the General Agreement of Tariffs and Trade (GATT) implements the "Consensus Principles", DSB under WTO is implemented with the "reverse consistent principle".The opposition will make the judgment fail; the latter is that as long as one party is in favor, the judgment results can be passed.In real life, the party or the victorious party that the request is proposed will support the judgment report that guarantees the claim and the realization of the rights, so the final judgment of the DSB can be implemented automatically and quickly.The appealing agency won the reputation of "Pearl in the WTO Crown".

Further observation found that since the establishment of DSB, among the WTO members of trade disputes, there are both developed countries (58%), as well as developing countries (accounting for 42%), and 164 WTO membersRegardless of the strength of the country's size and economic strength, you can participate in the lawsuit of DSB as an appeal party or the respondent; and DSB also grows "teeth", that is, the party who refuses to execute the final judgment.DSB can authorize another party to retaliate.Unlike unilateralist measures, this revenge has legal compliance and moral legitimacy, which is in line with the principles and spirit of multilateralism.

MPIA has not been fully recognized by WTO members

However, from the seven judges of the appealing agency in 2017, three people have ended in office, to the second phase of the Mauritius Judge of the following year, the appointment of the second phase of Mauritius has not been approved.During the expiration of the judge, the unilateral obstruction and negation of the United States during the period, the selection procedure of the new judge of the DSB appealing agency has not started as scheduled.As of now, the United States has denied the procedure 63 times.According to the requirements, at least three judges participated in the final report was considered valid, but in the second half of 2019, the only one judge had only one judge, which means that the stopping of the DSB appealing agency has actually lasted for more than three years for more than three years.time.

The problem is that during the suspension of the DSB appealing agency, friction disputes in the international trade field continued to occur. Many cases were rested to DSB expert groups.Cases that resorted to the door and the accumulation of mountains fell into a cycle of death.In order to prevent the intensification and upgrade of trade conflicts due to the paralysis of DSB appealing agencies, 21 members of the European Union and China, including the EU and China, jointly launched the establishment of a "multi -party temporary appeal arbitration arrangement" (MPIA) in April 2020. It has been in operation for nearly three years.It also produced substantial results.Among them, Turkish and EU's drug disputes, as well as the frozen fries disputes between Colombia and the European Union, were successfully resolved under the mechanism of MPIA.

However, although MPIA is open to all WTO members, three years have passed, and there are only four new members. At present, there are only 25 MPIA members, accounting for only 15.2%of the total number of WTO members, indicating more WTOThe members of the member country are not sufficient to confidence in MPIA, or they are wandering and watching.On the other hand, the effectiveness of the judgment made by MPIA can only be binding on the members who joined, and cannot be recognized by non -members. This also shows that the boundary of MPIA's role is actually very limited.

Looking back and seeing the explanation of the procedure many times, the United States says that the DSB appealing agency experts have the "over -right ruling". In several specific casesRules in the United States.Not only that, the United States believes that the consultation opinion of the DSB final report is included in the content that is not related to disputes, and the appealing agency is not properly given a precedent status, which indirectly violates the right to sign the rights of WTO members.At the same time, the United States also pointed out that the judges of the appealing agency have issues such as "trial overdue" and "overdue service"; and emphasized that before these key issues were resolved, the United States would not agree to start the procedures for filling the vacancy of the WTO appealing agency.

It is not allowed to deny that the DSB appealing agencies and experts have some defects in the United States. The key is that to this day, not only did the United States not give up the problem that solved the problem, but instead held a negative attitude towards any other party.It is also difficult to think of the fission and reversal of the USB construction posture, or to give polar obstacles to the addition of appealing agency judges, and the reason for it may not be as simple as what it is said.Especially in the context of economic globalization, the reconstruction of the competitive forces of major economies and the reorganization of the international trade pattern have caused the old order of the WTO led by the original traditional country, and encountered shake and impact.This may be the real reason why the United States has repeatedly blocked the appealing agency.

The dominance of the

WTO dispute mechanism has been in the hands of the United States for a long time, but the steps of the integration of emerging economies into the global trade system in the past 10 years have continued to accelerate, contributing to the increasing increase in international trade; and with the strength of its own strengthGrowth also hopes to release its own voice in the governance and reform of the WTO.This re -distribution of the right to speak based on the reconstruction of trade forces also exceeds US expectations, and when it is difficult to completely change this change, the United States strategically chooses to stop DSB appealing agencies and long -term drags, hoping to achieve gradual timeThe purpose of consuming the volume of the other party.

In addition, WTO and its DSB have been implementing and maintaining the rules of multilateral trading, but in the past 10 years, the United States is gradually giving up its original multilateral tradingist positions that they originally advocated and adhered to.Therefore, the international community is very clear that the two -thirds of the WTO illegal regulations are caused by the United States, and DSB has made a fair and fair judgment on this, and in fact, after the United States pays violations, the United States will become more and more strongly feeling stronger.By DSB is no longer a public product that can fully benefit themselves, and because it is unable to estimate and control the risk of exiting the WTO, and do not want to simply give up the protagonist status of the protagonist in the WTO, the United States chooses to interfere with the normal selection procedure of the DSB appealing agency. This is relatively conservative.way of doing.

After the joint efforts of members of the WTO, the MC12 achievement document reached by the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference (MC12) focuses on "the parties promise to have all members of all members before 2024,Solution mechanism.But from the perspective of many negotiating practice in history, the task time limit set by the Ministerial MeetingIt cannot be completed as scheduled.Therefore, the possibility of miscarriage about the reconstruction of DSB on DSB is also not ruled out.And the difficulty of restarting and recovery of DSB may far exceed expectations. The most direct reason is that DSB and even the entire WTO have become unnecessary for the United States. On the contraryBesides, in the case of DSB paralyzed, the United States can drill more opportunities and occupy a lot of convenience.

As an example, the case of large steel and aluminum disputes that spread to the large face as an example. At that time, the US President Trump raised 25%and 10 of steel and aluminum products imported EU, China, Japan and other places on the grounds of maintaining national security.%Tariff.After being sued, DSB issued a report from the expert group at the end of last year, ruled that the US tariff measures violated the WTO rules and suggested that the United States corrected it.In addition, five members such as China and Norway at the beginning of this year strongly required the United States to implement the decision to revoke imported steel and aluminum products to impose tariffs.Real demands, clear at a glance.

The author is a director and professor of economics in the Chinese Market Society