美国媒体评中国：没有人应当受骗上当。确实是贸易保护主义

*纽约时报*

纽约时报7月19日发表社论，题目是“没有人应当受骗上当。确实是贸易保护主义。”社论说，“世界贸易组织本月做出裁决，裁定中国限制出口原材料违反世贸规则。这是一个值得欢迎的决定。我们希望这会软化中国的重商主义战略。在这种战略之下，所有的政策决定都是为了能用来扶持中国的出口商。世贸组织的裁决也应当是警告其他国家不要采用这种贸易保护主义的手法。”
5.39.217.76: Q  K/ p+ m! E$ f
“世贸组织的裁决并不是依据世贸组织的总体规则，而是依据中国在2001年为了加入世贸组织而做出的结束大部分出口限制的承诺。近年来，中国对铝矾土和锌征收出口税，实行出口限额。去年，中国对用于制造手机电话和其他高技术产品的17种所谓的稀土金属实行出口限额，甚至出口禁令。中国掌握着全世界97%的稀土金属供应。”' y: I% `% Y2 t- z5 Y, I6 y5 P0 n0 Q

“世贸组织的裁决没有提到稀土出口配额问题。但裁决驳回了中国的说法，这就是中国对其他原材料实行出口限制是有理，因为实行限制是为了保护环境和公众健康。世贸组织则认为，中国的这些说法荒诞不经。因为中国的限制并不适用于中国国内的生产或消费。这种限制只是有利于中国国内产业，并导致世界市场上这些原材料价格上升。”

“中国可以对世贸组织的裁决提出上诉。假如中国败诉，就必须取消出口限制，否则将受到贸易制裁。中国也应当取消对稀土金属的出口限制。”

3 F0 W1 U) v' ]9 A! F0 Y5 `4 j

來源 / 版權所有：  以上所述媒体 / VOA
(以上内容摘自或摘译自其它媒体  / VOA，不代表發帖者观点)TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。, a, g" j# d" D  y4 ~7 N& G
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。" J6 ^0 `4 n! o8 W7 C+ F

註：上文引述相關媒體，摘文轉貼樓下

收藏分享評分

回復引用

訂閱 TOP

aa00

資深版主

Rank: 23

資深版主勳章

2^#

發表於 2011-7-20 11:06 AM | 只看該作者

Editorial5.39.217.763 e' m; i! d8 d
Nobody Should Be Fooled. It’s Protectionism.Published: July 18, 2011

The World Trade Organization’s ruling this month against China’s restrictions on the export of raw materials is a welcome decision that we hope will temper China’s mercantilistic strategy, in which every policy decision is designed to favor Chinese exporters. It also should serve as a warning to others about these protectionist tools.

5.39.217.76* s3 S0 O, ]0 v4 j& \$ H8 P: v; v$ H
Prices of commodities are rising fast as growth in developing countries increases demand. The W.T.O.’s rules, which have been crafted mostly to remove barriers to imports, must be adapted to address this new threat. 公仔箱論壇; D! U) p( j' w3 i& |

The ruling was not based on general W.T.O. rules but on commitments that China had made in 2001 to end most export restrictions in order to join the group. In recent years, China has put export duties and export quotas on materials like bauxite and zinc. Last year, it imposed quotas and even export bans on 17 so-called rare earth metals (used in cellphones and other high-tech devices), of which China accounts for 97 percent of the world’s supply. tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb8 k3 _* @  f+ e0 s

The verdict did not refer to the rare earth quotas, but it rejected China’s argument that export restrictions on other raw materials were justified because they were meant to protect the environment and protect public health. The W.T.O. found those arguments to be bogus since the restraints do not apply to domestic production or consumption. They benefit China’s domestic industry and push up prices of the materials on global markets. 5.39.217.76# x6 n+ f- p& M  f: U5 Z5 v- E

China can appeal this decision. If it loses, it would have to remove the restraints or suffer sanctions. It should also remove export limits on rare earth metals.
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb% Q2 s$ E6 J* ~8 ~7 @; d( x
The W.T.O. must consider how to fight export restraints more broadly. In 2007 and 2008, 25 of 81 countries surveyed by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization banned food exports or imposed export taxes. These policies have pushed up prices, undermining confidence in food markets and encouraging hoarding. 公仔箱論壇" I2 r# ?. x9 l8 H

The W.T.O. allows countries to set temporary export restrictions to prevent or relieve “critical shortages.” There is no clear definition of what this means and leading economies have been unwilling to push for tighter standards. Access to resources is becoming fiercely contentious. The world economies need clear rules to avoid undue competition that could spark new trade wars. TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。2 `+ ?8 r. W# B

公仔箱論壇, U) ]+ |( T% [. S- h" w' n# S
The New York Times 5.39.217.760 Z" v, e% V3 @7 M1 B# n8 y

TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。8 N6 j! j& }7 p$ b1 ]
5.39.217.76% |1 m2 g4 ?/ N3 \9 G2 i
5.39.217.76+ b0 k% b- m0 M( K3 p- `+ x
來源 / 版權所有：  以上所述媒体
(以上内容摘自或摘译自其它媒体，不代表發帖者观点)

回復引用

TOP

返回列表