South Korea last week said that it would give up its “developing country” status at the WTO, which means it would forgo unconditional rights that come with its special and differential treatment (S&D) to protect its sensitive agriculture industry.
South Korean Minister of Economy and Finance Hong Nam-ki told a news conference in Seoul on Friday it would be difficult for the country to be recognized as a developing country in negotiations at the WTO with its enhanced global economic standing.
Yet it is clear that this announcement follows pressure from the US. Since early this year, US President Donald Trump has pressed the WTO to make sure that self-declared developing countries, especially China, do not take advantage of preferential treatment that is not consistent with their economic strengths and levels of development, while also pushing for an overhaul of the rules that address unfair trading practices. Washington proposes that member states should not be categorized as “developing” and enjoy S&D status if they are a member of the G20 or Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, classified as a high-income country by the World Bank, or they account for at least 0.5 percent of global merchandise trade.
South Korea, which has maintained its developing country status since 1995, meets all four of these criteria. Its government’s decision means that South Korea would not have more time to implement free-trade commitments, could not enjoy more exemptions from other member states’ safeguard actions and might be less likely to levy higher tariffs on imports to protect some domestic industries.
However, its move toward more trade liberalization and the further opening of its markets is a positive development for Taiwan, where policymakers believe a level playing field in Taiwan-South Korea trade would lead to mutually beneficial results for both economies in the long term. Taiwan already last year switched its status from a “developing” to a “developed” country in WTO negotiations, as the government intended for the nation to move toward trade liberalization to better connect with the global market, while paving the way for plans to join the Japan-led, high-standard Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Meanwhile, farmers in Taiwan and South Korea have voiced their opposition to the decision to drop the developing country status. It remains to be seen if the potential benefits from the change would offset the loss of S&D benefits and the possible negative impact on sensitive agricultural industries. Nonetheless, the development adds pressure on China.
China has been the world’s second-largest economy in terms of nominal GDP since 2010 and has continued to recognize itself as a developing country since joining the WTO in 2001. This status enables it to provide subsidies in agriculture and set higher barriers to market entry. Simultaneously, China promotes non-market, non-transparent policies, such as state subsidies and other protectionist measures, to undermine the fair competition environment of global trade, sparking criticism and punitive tariffs from the US and Europe.
As Washington and Beijing remain locked in a trade war, Trump in July threatened to withdraw recognition of developing country status for China and other wealthy economies at the WTO unless changes are made to the trade body’s rules.
However, 45 countries (including China and India) this month submitted to the WTO their opposition to the plan, and it would be naive to think that China would voluntarily change its status without more pressure from the White House. Seoul’s move could increase that pressure on Beijing, but more is needed from other fronts to address China’s problematic trade practices.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then