| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立中興大學 === 國際政治研究所 === 94 === By the year of 2005, the quota of trade in textile and clothing ceased, China started then exporting its textile and clothing with highly comparative advantage to all over the world and its amount of exporting hit record high ranked top in the world.
The European Union, one of China’s main exporting regions, and the traditional supplying countries of textile and clothing were hit hand. In addition, the under-developing and the developing countries with low value –added and low technology intensive industries suffered from the deteriorating competition in the international trade. Thus European Union requested to renegotiate with China based on the right derived from the Report of the working Party on the Accession of China Article 242, in 2001 when China was entered into WTO.
China and the EU reached an agreement that required China to follow quota as before, although the EU relaxed the limitation of unapproved textile and clothing exporting to it by the restriction of the Report Article 242. This research, however found that the regulations of the Report Article 242, are relatively less demanding than the WTO agreement of safeguards and Protocol on the Accession of the People’s Republic of China Article 16 and the farmer was loosely defined in most critical issues. Therefore, the importing countries like the EU has storing discretionary power over how to follow the regulations under the Report Article 242. China, presumably, would suffer from the misrepresentation of the details of Article 242 by the member countries of the WTO. China was unable to avoid the confrontation of the WTO member countries to utilize the advantages of freely judging Article 242.
The research concluded that there exist some disputes and disagreements between China and the EU: (1) Article 242 contains several controversial regulations and clauses, (2) some multilateral agreements related to Article 242 are not precisely defined and Clause 10 (a) the Regulation No. 3030/93, has contradicting safeguard procedures from the regulations of Article 242, (3) the disputes between the announcing effectiveness of the EU and the jurisdiction power of the WTO, and (4) the function of TSSC may violate the obligations of the EU required by the WTO and the newly levied quota by the EU may also violate the principles of the WTO.
|
|---|
