精东传媒

June 11, 2021

Morrison's dilemma: Australia needs a dual strategy for its trade relationship with China

It is the United States, not China, that has undermined the role of the WTO as the mechanism for settling trade disputes

En route to this year鈥檚 in the UK, Australia鈥檚 Prime Minister Scott Morrison yesterday delivered a speech in Perth on 鈥溾��.

He spoke of 鈥淎ustralia鈥檚 preparedness to withstand economic coercion in recent times鈥�. As 鈥渢he most practical way to address economic coercion鈥�, he called for reform of the World Trade Organization, particularly 鈥渢he restoration of the global trading body鈥檚 binding dispute settlement system鈥�.

It wasn鈥檛 hard to work out what 鈥� and who 鈥� he was talking about: China.

But Morrison faces a conundrum in his pitch to reform the WTO to resolve , which has blocked or restricted of beef, wheat, lobster, timber and coal, and imposed high tariffs on barley and wine.

But it isn鈥檛 China that has undermined the role of the WTO as the global mechanism for settling trade disputes peacefully through agreed rules and procedures.

The blame for that rests with the United States, which under the Trump administration effectively rendered inoperable.

By emphasising China鈥檚 economic coercion and using it to appeal to the US and others to reform the World Trade Organization, the Morrison government is playing a risky game. It may be squandering an opportunity to engage more constructively with China on common interests.

Trade disputes with China

As diplomatic relations between China and Australia deteriorated over the past 18 months 鈥� fuelled by things such as Australia leading the call for an independent investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 virus 鈥� China鈥檚 trade restrictions on Australian imports escalated.

By December 2020 Australia was ready to make its very first complaint against China 鈥� over China鈥檚 five-year 80.5% tariff on Australian barley. The Morrison government is now over China鈥檚 tariffs of as high as 200% on Australian wine.

Appellate Court in limbo

The WTO established a panel to review the barley tariff in May.

Even if Australia does win its case, it faces the of how long China takes in acting on the WTO ruling.

But before that is the problem of the WTO making a final ruling.

Like other court systems the WTO has an appeals mechanism, known as the Appellate Body. The Appellate Body is meant to have seven members, and requires a quorum of three judges to hear an appeal. Members are appointed to four-year terms. Appointments require all of the WTO鈥檚 164 member nations to agree.

The US, however, has blocked every appointment and reappointment over the past four years or so. Now the Appellate Body has no members. So no dispute taken to the WTO can be resolved if one of the disputing parties appeals.

If Australia does win its case against China, and China appeals, the until the Appellate Body can hear that appeal.

Shared trade interests

On this issue, Australia and China have a shared position. In 2018, for example, they with other countries to push for the appointment of Appellate Body members.

They also have common interests on some other reform issues in trade that Morrison mentioned in his speech, such as the digital economy and environmental sustainability. Reducing pollution from is an example.

Morrison鈥檚 speech, however, tended to highlight the differences rather than shared interests in the international trading system.

鈥淲e are facing heightened competition in the Indo-Pacific region,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e know that because we live here. The task is to manage that competition. Competition does not have to lead to conflict. Nor does competition justify coercion.鈥�

Need for a dual strategy

Morrison鈥檚 speech did acknowledge the need for 鈥渁ll nations to participate in the global system鈥�. Australia, he said, 鈥渟tands ready to engage in dialogue with all countries on shared challenges, including China when they are ready to do so with us鈥�.

But Australia鈥檚 national interest demands more than just standing ready. The government needs to do the proverbial walking and chewing gum at the same time.

Though its primary motivation for WTO reform may be Australia鈥檚 trade disputes with China, it cannot ignore the need to promote that reform through engaging and collaborating with China, now the world鈥檚 biggest economy and Australia鈥檚 by far.

This won鈥檛 be easy. There are some big differences that separate China from Australia and its allies. The Chinese government is far more involved in its economy than the market-based ethos that drove the establishment of the World Trade Organization in the first place.

Negotiating these differences peacefully will require delicate conversations over the boundaries of trade law and policy. That will be impossible in an environment of mutual distrust.

Any WTO reform will .

Finding common ground on reinstating a reformed WTO Appellate Body could be a starting point for tempering this lack of trust. It could pave the way for the two nations to de-escalate and move closer to resolving their disputes.

---

 

, Associate Professor, Director of Research and member of Herbert Smith Freehills CIBEL Centre, Faculty of Law and Justice, UNSW Sydney, and , Associate Professor of Law and Director of the UOW Transnational Law and Policy Centre,

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. 

---

 

UOW academics exercise academic freedom by providing expert commentary, opinion and analysis on a range of ongoing social issues and current affairs. This expert commentary reflects the views of those individual academics and does not necessarily reflect the views or policy positions of the 精东传媒 of 精东传媒.