China blocks panel requests by the U.S., EU and Japan on “rare earths” dispute

The United States, the European Union and Japan told the DSB they were, respectively, requesting the establishment of a panel as their consultations with China had failed to resolve their concerns.

By ·

At yesterday’s Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) China said it was not in a position to accept the establishment of a panel requested by the United States, the European Union and Japan regarding its measures related to the exportation of rare earths, tungsten and molybdenum.

The United States, the European Union and Japan told the DSB they were, respectively, requesting the establishment of a panel as their consultations with China had failed to resolve their concerns.

Late last year, Congressman Don Manzullo (R-IL), Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia & the Pacific, held a hearing to highlight the fact that China controls 97 percent of the rare earths market and has been limiting exports.

As reported in Logistics Management, this was said to cause “skyrocketing” costs of the minerals to the detriment of manufacturers in the U.S. and other countries.

The United States said because of China’s position as a leading global producer of these materials, China’s export restraint measures gave China the ability to significantly affect global supply and pricing. It said that the materials at issue are key inputs in the production of a wide range of important products, such as hybrid car batteries, wind turbines, automobiles and advanced electronics. It added that the export restraints appeared to be inconsistent with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and China’s Protocol of Accession.

The European Union said China’s export restrictions significantly distort the market and create competitive advantages for the Chinese manufacturing industry to the detriment of foreign competitors. It said these policies put pressure on foreign producers to move their operations and technologies to China. It recognized environmental protection and sustainable resource management as legitimate aims but strongly believed that export restrictions are not the appropriate tools to promote these aims.

Japan said that the materials at issue are used by its industry in the production of various final products, such as catalysts and polishing media. China’s export restrictions have caused a short supply of the materials in the international market and significant price differences between China’s domestic market and export market. It said that Japanese manufacturers have faced difficulty in purchasing the materials from China, putting them at a disadvantageous position with their Chinese counterparts.

China said that its policies in question are aimed at protecting natural resources and achieving sustainable economic development. It said it was puzzled by the complainants’ initiation of the panel process as it has no intention of protecting its domestic industry through means that would distort trade. It added that at the present meeting, it was not in a position to accept the establishment of a panel.


About the Author

Patrick Burnson, Executive Editor
Patrick Burnson is executive editor for Logistics Management and Supply Chain Management Review magazines and web sites. Patrick is a widely-published writer and editor who has spent most of his career covering international trade, global logistics, and supply chain management. He lives and works in San Francisco, providing readers with a Pacific Rim perspective on industry trends and forecasts. You can reach him directly at [email protected]

Subscribe to Logistics Management Magazine!

Subscribe today. It's FREE!
Get timely insider information that you can use to better manage your entire logistics operation.
Start your FREE subscription today!

Article Topics

Global · Logistics · Trade · All Topics
Latest Whitepaper
How Lean is your Lean Quality Program?
Avoid quality program bureaucracy that can sap logistics productivity and increase costs
Download Today!
From the September 2016 Issue
Indecision revolving around three complex supply chain elements—transportation, technology and organizational structure—finds many companies waiting to commit to a strategic path. However, waiting too long will only result in a competitive disadvantage that will be difficult to overcome in today’s fast-paced, global economy.
Time for Asia’s ports to rebuild
Is the freight recession upon us…again?
View More From this Issue
Subscribe to Our Email Newsletter
Sign up today to receive our FREE, weekly email newsletter!
Latest Webcast
Supply Chain Best Practices: Visibility to In-Transit Inventory
During this webcast you'll learn on how various organizations have gained instant access to in-transit parcels and given access to this information to stakeholders.
Register Today!
EDITORS' PICKS
25th Annual Masters of Logistics
Indecision revolving around three complex supply chain elements—transportation, technology and...
2016 Quest for Quality: Winners Take the Spotlight
Which carriers, third-party logistics providers and U.S. ports have crossed the service-excellence...

Regional ports concentrate on growth and connectivity
With the Panama Canal expansion complete, ocean cargo gateways in the Caribbean are investing to...
Digital Reality Check
Just how close are we to the ideal digital supply network? Not as close as we might like to think....