The recent fact-finding tour to China by trade officials from
the European Union (EU) marks a necessary but overdue step towards
settling the anti-dumping dispute over Chinese shoe exports.
It is overdue because too little time is left for the truth to
prevail, as the EU is set to impose an unfair punitive tariff on
some Chinese shoes.
It is needed because this is the largest anti-dumping case the
EU has launched against China, involving shoes worth more than €
300 million (US$390 million) and millions of Chinese workers. Also,
the move sets a precedent that both sides can use to properly deal
with trade disputes in the future.
By talking for the first time face-to-face with local
shoe-makers in
Zhejiang Province in East China, the EU trade officials are
expected to gain a sense of reality about the latest Sino-EU trade
conflict.
Seeing is believing. The visit to Zhejiang, one of the richest
provinces in China, which has largely based its success on a
thriving private sector, can help clear misunderstandings about the
practices of Chinese shoemakers.
Local enterprises are no longer State firms that run on
government subsidies and planning. In the shoemaking industry, an
overwhelming majority of players, if not all, are private companies
or joint ventures. They have to fight hard with each other for
survival.
The short trip must have deepened the EU trade officials'
comprehension of Chinese officials' commitment to free trade, as
well as the source of Chinese enterprises' competitive edge.
However, if that is not enough, the rising consumerism that the
World Consumers' Rights Day highlighted in the country might be
worthy of their attention.
Not that China is already a consumers' paradise. Protection of
consumers' rights is far from perfect in the home market.
Yet, surging public complaints and intense media coverage in
run-up to consumers' day explicitly showed that Chinese consumers
have become much more demanding as their choice increases and
diversifies.
From State-owned telecom giants that abuse their monopolies to
overcharge mobile phone users to private producers of low-quality
or unsafe food, businesses that profit at the cost of consumer
rights have all come under severe attack.
Chinese consumers have increasingly taken for granted their
right to demand better and cheaper goods and service. And since the
country has decided to base more of its economic growth on domestic
consumption, the understanding that what is good for consumers will
be good for the economy will take a deep root in the country.
Chinese shoemakers have to face ferocious domestic
competition.
Hence, it is unwise to deny market economy status for Chinese
shoemakers by written criteria and not reality.
Local industries' calls for protection rumble on in some EU
member countries. To prevent the situation from escalating into
full-blown protectionism, EU trade officials must keep an eye on
the interests of both industries and consumers.
Satisfying the needs of a specific industry at the sacrifice of
the public, not to mention the interest of related industries, is
not the correct response to the challenge of globalization.
(China Daily March 16, 2006)
