WTO rejects U.S. attempt to protect itself in trade war
Perhaps the United States was imagining that 35 of its domestic steel companies were forced into bankruptcy while European, South American and Asian steel producers flooded our market with cheap imports. Perhaps tens of thousands of U.S. steelworkers who lost their jobs only imagined having to file for unemployment benefits and seek new work.
That's one explanation for the World Trade Organization's ruling against the U.S. effort to protect its domestic industry against years of unfair, cut-rate steel imports. The other explanation is that the WTO is far more interested in allowing a majority of its members to gang up on the United States than it is in promoting fair trade.
A strong defense
President Bush reluctantly introduced duties of up to 30 percent on steel products in March 2002. He took criticism from his own party and from some industries, such as automakers, who said the tariffs protected domestic producers by driving up the costs for fabricators and their users. But Bush had vowed to protect the domestic steel industry, and made good on his word by standing behind the tariffs.
The European Union and seven other nations complained that the duties hurt their industries, which is true enough. But that view ignores the fact that their industries were being propped up unfairly. By dumping their excess production on the U.S. market, those nations were exporting their potential unemployment to the United States.
One of the complaining nations was China. The very idea of China, which has amassed hundreds of billions of dollars worth of exports to the United States during the years that the U.S. steel industry was being decimated, complaining about unfair trade demonstrates the one-sided view other nations take in their trade relations with the United States.
Political blackmail
Armed with the new ruling by the WTO, the European Union is ready to impose $2.2 billion in retaliatory duties on U.S. imports. It has carefully chosen its targets, ranging from footwear to fruit and vegetables, in an effort to put political pressure on the president. The products come from states that are important to President Bush's re-election effort.
The president should not allow himself to be intimidated. If the EU, China, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland, Norway, New Zealand and Brazil want a trade war, that is their choice. But the United States cannot afford to see its ability to produce steel on its own shores destroyed mill by mill, company by company, job by job.
U.S. Rep. Phil English of Erie, R-3rd, is chairman of the Congressional Steel Caucus and a critic of the WTO's rulings.
& quot;The WTO is trying to change the rules arbitrarily and without precedent to dismantle America's trade laws in order to attack the U.S. manufacturing base, & quot; English said.
We hope the president is listening.