经济学人124:世贸组织与中国的交锋

 　　The WTO and China

　　Hands slapped
　　世贸组织与中国的交锋
　　A ruling with ramifications 1
　　裁决之意，一石多鸟
　　Jul 7th 2011 | from the print edition
　　WHEN China joined the World Trade Organisation 2 (WTO) in late 2001, its share of world exports stood at 4.3%. By last year that share had soared to 10.6%, and the country had become the world’s biggest exporter. In addition to awe 3 and envy, its rise has spawned 4 a rapidly growing list of trade quarrels. China was a party to only two of the 93 trade disputes that were taken to the WTO between its accession and the end of 2005. But in the five years to the end of 2010, it was involved in 26 of the 84 cases filed at the forum 5.
　　中国于2001年底加入世贸组织时，对外贸易出口额仅占世界总额的4.3%。然而，去年该比例已飙升到10.6%，使得中国已经成为世界上最大的出口国。对此，各国有敬畏也有嫉妒，因而贸易纷争骤增。在中国入世后至2005年年底这段时间，世贸组织所处理的商业纠纷中，只有两起牵涉到中国。然而，在05年到10年底这段时间，世贸处理的84起纠纷中，就有26起牵扯到中国。
　　On July 5th the WTO’s dispute-settlement body found against China on three linked complaints. The cases were brought by America, the European Union and Mexico in 2009 and took issue with China’s policy of restricting the exports of certain industrial raw materials, including bauxite 6, magnesium 7, zinc 8 and silica, of which it is a leading producer. The plaintiffs argued that China’s policies gave domestic firms that use these commodities an unfair competitive advantage, while also restricting world supply of these inputs 9 and causing their prices to soar.
　　7月5号，世贸争议解决机构在连续3场投诉中都判定中国违规。这3场投诉由美国、欧盟、墨西哥于2009年提出，他们的投诉理由为，中国在铝土矿、镁、锌硅等工业原料方面是主要产出国，但是中国制定政策，限制这些原料的出口。原告认定，中国的政策限制这些商品的供给，引起价格飙升，从而让国内利用这些原料的公司具有竞争优势，这很不公平。
　　China says its restrictions 10 were motivated by its desire to conserve 11 the world’s limited supply of these materials and to protect the environment from the pollution caused by their extraction. The problem with this line of argument, as the WTO panel noted 12, was that although China restricted the export of these commodities, it had done nothing to reduce their actual production. China’s policies were in clear violation 13 of its WTO commitments, it found.
　　中国辩护说设定这些限制完全出于以下考虑，中方有意节约这些稀有资源，同时减少提炼带来的环境污染。世贸专门问题小组认为，该论证的问题在于，虽然说中国限制这些原料的出口，可是它完全没有减少实际产出。该小组认为中国的政策显然违背了它入世时的承诺。
　　China expressed “regret” at the WTO’s ruling and has up to 60 days to lodge 14 an appeal. Jeffrey Schott of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a think-tank in Washington, DC, expects “several more big cases against China soon”. But the significance of this judgment 15 goes beyond China. Many countries banned some food exports during the food-price spike 16 of 2008. A renewed period of buoyant commodity prices and demand could easily tempt 17 more governments to emulate 18 China’s restrictions on exports of raw materials. The WTO’s judgment may dissuade 19 at least some countries from doing so. And given the rotten state of the Doha round of trade talks, a show of teeth in defence of a rules-based trading system is more useful than ever.
　　中国认为世贸组织裁判不公，因而花费多达60天提出上诉。彼得森国际经济研究所是华盛顿的智囊团，其员工杰弗里?斯科特认为，“中国很快就得面对几场更大的投诉。”然而审判的意义其实不在于针对中国。2008年食品价格狂升时，许多国家都禁止进食品出口。现在各国面临新一轮的食品价格上涨，需求增大，所以它们很可能效仿中国，限制原材料出口。世贸组织做此判定至少可以阻止某些国家采用这条计策。然而，考虑到多边贸易谈判的糟糕情况，我们有必要在此刻展示出维护有规可循的贸易体系的勇气，这会比以往任何时候都有效。