On February 1, the US government announced a new 10% tariff on Chinese imports under the pretext of fighting the growth of the opioid fentanyl. The next day, a spokesman for China’s Foreign Ministry said that China would lament and oppose the move and take necessary measures to defend its legitimate rights and interests.
Indeed, the new tariffs are counterproductive not only in their efforts to curb the production and distribution of fentanyl, but also in their efforts for bilateral trade relations.
The United States is one of the largest consumers of fentanyl-based drugs in the world, and in recent years their abuse has exacerbated drug addiction and caused many deaths. The crisis has roots in long-standing patterns of opioid use in the country, key properties of the US pharmaceutical industry’s interests, inadequate public awareness and ineffective social governance.
China has some of the world’s most difficult counter-policy policies and laws. With a spirit of humanity and goodwill, China supports the US response to this issue. In response to US demand, China announced its decision in 2019 to officially schedule fentanyl-related substances as classes. China has implemented counter-catics cooperation with the US in areas such as scheduling drug-related substances, intelligence sharing, and individual case cooperation.
However, the US still insist on dramatizing the issue, accusing China of promoting the fentanyl crisis. However, scapegoating other countries due to a domestic crisis does not go away. The tariffs certainly aren’t.
Unilateral sanctions imposed by the US risk weakening anti-drug cooperation with China, and law enforcement is becoming more difficult as fentanyl precursor trades are implemented through black markets or through third countries. It may be.
Furthermore, these unilateral sanctions imposed violate the fundamental principles of the World Trade Organization (WTO), which are both members of China and the United States. 1947 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) – Trade, the predecessor of WHO, shall be conducted in a non-discriminatory manner.
However, unilateral sanctions imposed by the US on a particular country or business constitute a discriminatory treatment inherently. This undermines fair competition among WTO members and poses a potential threat to multilateral trade rules.
Furthermore, US practices violate the principles of national care as set out in Article 3 of the GATT. In this article, imported products must not be given any disadvantageous treatment based on their origins after they have entered the territory of WTO members. Sanctions imposed by the United States directly restrict the importation of legal drugs or their precursor chemicals, resulting in discrimination against imports from China.
The United States may attempt to justify unilateral tariffs by citing threats to public health or national security that can be used to justify tariffs under the GATT. However, to invoke article XX (the “general exception”) or Article XXI (the “security exception”), the US is concerned with imposition of tariffs to protect public health and national security. Sex and necessity as well as other lesser transactions, equally effective means. Factors such as the complexity of the fentanyl crisis and domestic demand make exceptions difficult to apply.
The frequent use of unilateral sanctions by the United States not only violates WTO core rules, but also disrupts international trade order and multilateral cooperation. In particular, abuse of exception clauses can encourage other countries to question the fairness and effectiveness of WTO rules. Possible retaliation in response to US tariffs from other WTO members could lead to global trade disputes and promote a trend towards fragmentation of the global trading system.
In the long run, US sanctions will also backfire at home. Higher tariffs will increase the prices of imported goods, increase the burden on American consumers, and reduce the competitiveness of US companies around the world.
The US should look at its own fentanyl problem in an objective and rational way, rather than threatening other countries with arbitrary tariff hikes. Reducing domestic demand for drugs and strengthening law enforcement cooperation could be an effective solution to the fentanyl crisis.
There are no winners in trade and tariff wars. My country firmly defends legitimate rights and interests, so pressure or threatening China is not the right way to do it.
Maintaining business relations between China and the US serves the fundamental interests of both countries and the ethnic groups, and benefits global economic growth. China will work with the US to address concerns through equal consultations, maintain the struggling positive dynamics in counteralcotics cooperation, and stable, sound and sustainable growth of bilateral trade and economic ties We hope to promote jointly.
The views expressed in this article are the authors themselves and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.