经济广角:分析:中美轮胎战

China boxes clever in trade dispute with US
Barack Obama’s decision last week to impose emergency tariffs on Chinese tyres has fuelled an increasingly familiar Sino- US war of words over trade.

Beijing launched an investigation yesterday into whether US poultry and car parts were being unfairly dumped in the Chinese market. It also requested formal consultations at the World Trade Organisation into the US tariffs – the first step in trying to have them declared illegal.

Whether it will succeed is unclear. The particular “safeguard” measure that the US president invoked was, after all, written specifically to allow the US to block Chinese imports as part of the price for China joining the WTO in 2001.

However, trade experts and lawyers say the episode does show the increasingly sophisticated legal strategies used by Beijing in its many disputes with trading partners, and the way it maximises political effect while trying to limit the actual economic damage.

Opinion is divided as to whether this dispute – while breaking ground by using a particular trade law for the first time – is likely by itself to set off a protectionist spiral.

Gao Yongfu, an expert in trade law at Shanghai Institute of Foreign Trade, said: “I think it unlikely that this dispute will be limited to just one industry – it’s likely to spread to others.”

Prof Gao said other trading partners, including the European Union, were likely to follow suit, broadening if not deepening the restrictions on trade.

Yet other trade lawyers and economists noted that China had threatened to retaliate in a way that had high political salience but modest economic impact.

Beijing has built a reputation for rapid but controlled retaliation during trade disputes. One Washington trade lawyer said: “China always responds, so I don’t think this escalates. It just repeats each time the US does something.”

Arthur Kroeber of Drag- onomics, a Beijing-based economic consultancy, said: “Chinese tit-for-tat measures are unlikely to wreak significant economic damage . . . We don’t believe that the case marks the start of Depression-type trade wars.”

The products that Beijing is threatening to target – while denying that it is retaliating for the tyre tariffs – are politically importance in the US.

Poultry farmers are a vocal part of America’s influential farm lobby, and are particularly aggressive in seeking out export opportunities, because the US market is largely saturated. The manufacture of cars and car parts is often heavily unionised and located in important Midwest states.

China’s choice of instrument is also telling. Besides proposing “anti-dumping” measures on imports deemed to be priced unfairly low, Beijing is looking at “countervailing duties”, used against goods that receive government subsidies.

Since the US frequently accuses China of illegal state aid to its exporters, Beijing would score valu- able propaganda points by making a counter-accus- ation stick, particularly in light of the vast US motor industry bail-out.

The Washington trade lawyer said: “The interesting part is adding a countervailing duty case. China is [already] running one on US steel, but auto parts from the bail-out money and a US agricultural product are more politically sensitive.”

The economic impact could be small, however. Both sectors are already the subject of separate disputes and involve limited trade volumes. In response to a two-year-old US ban on processed chicken imports from China, Beijing has banned imports of US chicken from several states and, in recent weeks, reports have emerged of an unofficial block on new shipments of US poultry.

Meanwhile, US exports of auto parts to China have been relatively limited, in part because of high tariffs that Beijing is only now beginning to dismantle after losing a ruling at the WTO.

From a distance, China’s reaction may look like it is lashing out in anger. But in the eyes of some trade experts, it is preparing a surgical counter-strike.

巴拉克•奥巴马(Barack Obama)上周决定对中国输美轮胎征收紧急关税，加剧了一场人们日渐熟悉的中美贸易论战。

北京方面昨日启动一项审查程序，以调查美国肉鸡和汽车部件是否在中国市场进行不公平的倾销。中国还请求在世界贸易组织(WTO)就美方的关税进行正式磋商——这是中方努力使这些关税被宣布为非法而迈出的第一步。

不清楚中方在这件事上能否取得成功。毕竟，美国总统援用的“特保”措施，是中国2001年为加入WTO而付出的代价的一部分，其内容就是为了让美国能够封堵中国输美商品。

不过，贸易专家和律师们表示，这一事例确实展现出，中国在与贸易伙伴的众多争端中，正采用日趋老练的法律策略，而且在具体操作上一方面最大化政治效应，另一方面试图限制实际经济损害。

这一争端标志着美方首次动用一部特别的贸易法律。至于争端本身是否可能引发螺旋式升级的保护主义措施，人们的看法不一。

上海对外贸易学院的贸易法专家高永富表示：“我认为，这一争端不太可能局限在仅仅一个行业，它很可能蔓延到其它行业。”

高教授表示，中国的其它贸易伙伴，包括欧盟，很可能出台类似举措，拓宽（如果不是加深的话）对贸易的限制范围。

但其他贸易律师和经济学家指出，中国已威胁要采取报复的方式，具有高度的政治声势，但经济影响不大。

北京在历次贸易争端中建立了报复快速而有节制的声誉。华盛顿的一名贸易律师表示：“中国一贯会有所反应，所以我不认为这件事会升级。每一次美国有所动作时，这种情况都会重复出现。”

北京经济咨询机构——龙洲经讯公司(Dragonomics)的葛艺豪(Arthur Kroeber)表示：“中方一报还一报的措施，不太可能造成重大经济损害……我们不相信这一争端标志着将爆发大萧条时代的那种贸易战。”

北京威胁要采取行动的产品，对美国具有政治重要性。中国否认相关行动是为了报复美方的轮胎关税。

在美国有影响力的农场游说势力中，家禽饲养者是一股声势浩大的力量，他们在寻找出口机遇方面特别积极，因为美国市场已基本饱和。汽车和汽车零部件制造业往往普遍成立了工会组织，这些产业分布于重要的中西部各州。

中国选择的手段也很说明问题。除了对定价被视为低得不公平的进口商品提议采取“反倾销”措施外，北京还在研究“反补贴税”——针对获得政府补贴的商品所动用的手段。

由于美国经常指责中国向出口商提供非法政府补贴，北京将通过作出有说服力的反指控（尤其是在美国汽车业获得政府大规模纾困的情况下），在宣传方面得到宝贵的分数。

前述华盛顿贸易律师表示：“有意思的部分在于添加了一个反补贴审查程序。中国（已经）在对美国钢材进行这样的调查，但得益于纾困资金的汽车零部件，加上美国的一种农产品，将更具政治敏感性。”

不过，经济影响可能相对较小。这两个行业都已经是其它争端的对象，而且涉及的贸易量有限。美国已针对中国的加工鸡肉产品实行了两年的进口禁令，对此，北京已禁止从美国数个州进口鸡肉产品。近几周又有报道称，美国新发货的家禽产品遭到非官方封堵。

与此同时，美国向中国出口的汽车零部件相对有限，部分原因是中国实行的高额关税——北京在WTO一项裁决中失利后，刚开始取消这些关税。

从远处看，中国的反应也许像是在愤怒抨击。但在某些贸易专家眼里，中国则是在准备发起一次外科手术式的反击。