Jackson Vanik will pass – bipartisan support of congress and interest groups gives momentum
Download 0.68 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Global Trade Impact – Link Extension
- Russia is the linchpin of the WTO-accession is key to cred and coverage
- This still holds-now is key
- Global Trade Impact-China War
- US-China trade disputes guarantees global economic depression and large scale conflict that escalates
- Impact is extinction
Global Trade Impact – BrinkRetaliation imminent without repealRoth, 3/20 (Andrew, “Jackson-Vanik Trades Places”, Russia Profile, http://russiaprofile.org/international/56157.html, BJM) Putting aside questions over Russia’s business environment and civil rights record, the key factor driving the debate now is Russia’s imminent accession to the WTO. Experts expect Russia to finalize its accession to the WTO by July this year, leaving American businesses operating in Russia subject to retaliatory tariffs if the amendment isn’t shelved. Andrew Somers, the president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Russia, told National Public Radio that tariffs for American businesses in Russia would likely remain at the current rate of ten percent, and won’t be adjusted to the seven percent required by the WTO if Jackson-Vanik remains on the books. Global Trade Impact – Link ExtensionLack of repeal tanks US tradeThai News Service, 3/23 “Russia: Russia vs. substitutions of Jackson-Vanik Amendment”, Factiva, BJM A relic of the Cold War era between the United States and Soviet Union could soon be an obstacle to improving trade between the U.S. and Russia, experts say. Jackson-Vanik amendment The relic in question is known as the Jackson-Vanik amendment, which Congress passed as a modification to the 1974 Trade Act that regulated commerce between the United States and nations that were then controlled by communist governments. Under Jackson-Vanik, Washington could not establish normal trade relations with another country unless that country granted its citizens full and unrestricted rights to emigrate. At the time, the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies severely restricted emigration. Congress initially passed the law in response to the Soviet Union's emigration restrictions, particularly with respect to its Jewish citizens, Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said during a recent hearing. Jackson-Vanik served its purpose. It helped millions of Jews emigrate freely. But it is now a relic of the past, Baucus said. Every president, regardless of political party, has waived Jackson-Vanik's requirements for Russia for the past 20 years. Economic impact The Obama administration agrees, saying U.S. businesses will suffer unless Congress repeals Jackson-Vanik. Repeal would open the way for U.S. companies to continue doing normal business on a permanent basis with Russia, which is expected to become a full member of the Geneva-based World Trade Organization (WTO) this year. The WTO, which oversees the rules of international trade, approved Russia's membership application last December and trade experts expect Moscow to ratify the agreement by July. As a full WTO member, Moscow must agree to a series of trade rules, including a ceiling on tariff levels imposed on imported goods and the protection of intellectual property. In addition, Russia will have to amend its economic and trade laws to make them conform to international standards. Most trade experts agree that Jackson-Vanik should be repealed as soon as possible. First, it applies to a country that no longer exists - the Soviet Union, Anders Aslund, a Russia expert with the Peterson Institute for International Economics, told VOA. Secondly, the problem in question is emigration and that has not been a problem for many years. Business Thirdly, adds Aslund, if the Jackson-Vanik amendment is not repealed, tariffs on Russian goods to the United States could increase to 50 percent, severely curtailing, if not ending, all Russian exports to the United States. U.S. exports to Russia would also be greatly affected, he said. U.S. business leaders are closely watching the issue. They say their business in Russia will suffer unless Moscow is granted permanent normal trade relations, or PNTR, with the United States. This trade status can be granted only after Jackson-Vanik is revoked. Russia has committed upon accession (to WTO) to significantly reduce its tariffs on imported agricultural equipment, from 15 percent to five percent, Sam Allen, chairman of Deere and Company, told a recent congressional hearing. However, it is likely that Russia would not extend the lower tariff rates to the U.S.-made products until it is granted PNTR. Russia is the linchpin of the WTO-accession is key to cred and coverageCRS Report 2008 (January 7, Russia's Accession to the WTO, http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/rl31979.pdf) Russia is the largest and most populous country that is not a member of the WTO. If Russia accedes, it would significantly expand the geographical coverage of WTO rules to all major economies leading to a larger degree of stability and transparency to the international trading system. This still holds-now is keyReuters 10/29 (US lawmakers warn Obama over Russia's WTO bid, http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFTRE79S2TP20111029?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0) Russian entry to the WTO would be the biggest step in world trade liberalization since China joined a decade ago, and the United States and the European Union have urged all sides to try to settle membership terms by the end of this year. Global Trade Impact-China WarFailure to save the WTO guarantees the world splits into US and China trade blocsIkenberry, 2008 (G. John, Albert G. Milbank Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University, “The Rise of China and the Future of the West,” Foreign Affairs, January/February, http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20080101faessay87102-p30/g-john-ikenberry/the-rise-of-china-and-the-future-of-the-west.html) The United States should also renew its support for wide-ranging multilateral institutions. On the economic front, this would include building on the agreements and architecture of the WTO, including pursuing efforts to conclude the current Doha Round of trade talks, which seeks to extend market opportunities and trade liberalization to developing countries. The WTO is at a critical stage. The basic standard of nondiscrimination is at risk thanks to the proliferation of bilateral and regional trade agreements. Meanwhile, there are growing doubts over whether the WTO can in fact carry out trade liberalization, particularly in agriculture, that benefits developing countries. These issues may seem narrow, but the fundamental character of the liberal international order -- its commitment to universal rules of openness that spread gains widely -- is at stake. Similar doubts haunt a host of other multilateral agreements -- on global warming and nuclear nonproliferation, among others -- and they thus also demand renewed U.S. leadership. The strategy here is not simply to ensure that the Western order is open and rule-based. It is also to make sure that the order does not fragment into an array of bilateral and "minilateral" arrangements, causing the United States to find itself tied to only a few key states in various regions. Under such a scenario, China would have an opportunity to build its own set of bilateral and "minilateral" pacts. As a result, the world would be broken into competing U.S. and Chinese spheres. The more security and economic relations are multilateral and all-encompassing, the more the global system retains its coherence. US-China trade disputes guarantees global economic depression and large scale conflict that escalatesLiu, 2005 (Henry C K, Chairman of a New York-based private investment group, Asia Times, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/global_economy/GH20Dj01.html) The danger of trade wars US geopolitical hostility toward China will manifest itself first in trade friction, which will lead to a mutually recriminatory trade war between the two major economies that will attract opportunistic trade realignments among the traditional allies of the United States. US multinational corporations, unable to steer US domestic politics, will increasingly trade with China through their foreign subsidiaries, leaving the US economy with even fewer jobs, and a condition that will further exacerbate anti-China popular sentiments that translate into more anti-free-trade policies generally and anti-China policies specifically. The resultant global economic depression from a trade war between the world's two largest economies will in turn heighten further mutual recriminations. An external curb from the US of Chinese export trade will accelerate a redirection of Chinese growth momentum inward, increasing Chinese power, including military power, while further encouraging anti-US sentiment in Chinese policy circles. This in turn will validate US apprehension of a China threat, increasing the prospect for armed conflict. A war between the US and China can have no winners, particularly on the political front. Even if the US were to prevail militarily through its technological superiority, the political cost of military victory would be so severe that the US as it currently exists would not be recognizable after the conflict and the original geopolitical aim behind the conflict would remain elusive, as the Vietnam War and the Iraq war have demonstrated. By comparison, the Vietnam and Iraq conflicts, destructive as they have been to the US social fabric, are mere minor scrimmages compared with a war with China. Impact is extinctionChalmers Johnson, author of Blowback: the Costs and Consequences of American Empire, 2001, The Nation, p 20 China is another matter. No sane figure in the Pentagon wants a war with China, and all serious U.S. militarists know that china’s miniscule nuclear capacity is not offensive but a deterrent against the overwhelming US power arrayed against it (twenty archaic Chinese warheads versus more than 7,000 US warheads). Taiwan, whose status constitutes the still incomplete last act of the Chinese civil war, remains the most dangerous place on earth. Much as the 1914 assassination of the Austrian crown prince in Sarajevo led to a war that no wanted, a misstep in Taiwan by any side could bring the United States and China into a conflict that neither wants. Such a war would bankrupt the Unites States, deeply divided Japan, and probably end in a Chinese victory, given that China is the world’s most populous country and would be defending itself against a foreign aggressor. More seriously, it could easily escalate into a nuclear holocaust. However, given the nationalistic challenge to China’s sovereignty of any Taiwanese attempt to declare its independence formally, forward-deployed US forces on China’s borders have virtually no deterrent effect. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 0.68 Mb. Share with your friends:
|