一则新闻：美国对华201钢铁保障案
目前，大家来看《人民日报》2001年12月14日的一则新闻。
题目：中国关切美国201钢铁保障案
中国对外贸易经济合作部新闻发言人高燕表示，中国很关注美国国际贸易委员会（USITC）在201钢铁保障案中建议的支持性手段。美国国际贸易委员会在12月7日公布了在201条约下有关进口钢铁商品的建议手段，这类手段将非常快提交给美国总统。
高燕指出，USITC的大部分委员都建议对被调查的钢铁商品施加已经为期4年的高进口关税和关税配额。中国政府对该201条约调查后的建议与可能的后果表示关注。
高燕称，中国觉得，USITC的建议手段将阻止其它国家的钢铁商品进入美国市场。
高燕称，如此的壁垒或有悖于世界贸易组织所主张的贸易自由化政策，在全球经济增长放缓的近况下，不只会干扰国际贸易秩序的稳定，而且有害于在国际角逐中美国钢铁产业的健康进步。
在今年6月28日，USTIC开始对源于包含中国在内的其它国家和区域的4种钢铁商品进行调查。
该调查是依据《美国1974年贸易法案》的201节展开，目的是确定进口商品是不是威胁或损害美国国内钢铁产业。
高燕表示，中国一贯反对任何形式的贸易保护主义，不想看到正常的国际贸易遭到非正当贸易政策和手段的阻挠。她补充说，中国政府将密切注视该问题，并表示，她期望美国方面会进一步考虑中国和其它国家的立场，适合地处置该问题。（结束）
读罢这则新闻，大家会考虑几个问题。非常了解，中国和美国在201钢铁保障案中有矛盾。那样什么是201钢铁保障案？简言之，就是在《美国1974年贸易法案》201节下展开的有关钢铁商品的案子。具体而言，说来话长。
201钢铁保障案背景
考虑到明显的财务损失、收益、投资回报和市场份额的降低，美国总统布什于2001年6月5日针对美国钢铁产业面临的挑战宣布一项全方位的动议。作为动议的一部分，美国总统指示贸易代表办公室（USTR）需要USITC在201条约下启动有关钢铁进口对美国国内钢铁产业影响的调查（USTR给USITC请求信摘录）。
2001年6月28日，USITC对来自包含中国在内的其他国家和区域的4类钢铁商品进行调查。
2001年12月19日，USITC向美国总统递交其在201条约下有关钢铁商品进口调查的报告。
2002年3月5日，美国总统布什在一份通知中宣布对来自包含中国在内的其他国家和区域的某些钢铁商品进行不同形式的保障手段的裁决。
《美国1974年法案》第201节
依据201条约，遭到进口增加致使的紧急损害或紧急损害威胁的国内产业可以向USITC申请进口救济。USITC裁定一件产品是不是以实质上导致美国国内生产相同种类商品或直接角逐商品的产业紧急损害或紧急损害威胁的程度进口。假如委员会做出一定性裁定，他会推荐美国总统采取以预防或弥补损害为目的的救济，并促进针对进口角逐的产业调整。总统就是不是提供救济和救济的数目做出最后决定。
201条约不需要有关不公平贸易行为的裁定，这点不同于反倾销和反补贴法与《美国1930年关税法案》337节。但，201条约的损害需要被觉得比那些不公平贸易法律的需要高。201条约需要损害或损害威胁应当是紧急的，与进口增加是不是是导致紧急损害或紧急损害威胁的实质缘由（就是非常重要，在重要程度上高于其它任何原因）。
201条约的进口救济标准是基于GATT1994的第19条，在《WTO保障手段协定》中进一步概念。GATT第19条常常被叫做逃脱条约，由于当增加的进口商品对于国内生产厂家正在导致或正在威胁导致紧急损害的时候，它允许一国暂时性的从GATT所规定的有关商品的义务中逃脱。201条约为美国总统调用在GATT19条中的权利提供了美国法律下的法律框架。
何时：USITC一收到代表国内产业的贸易协会、公司、注册或认同的联合会或工人团体的申请；一收到总统或USTR的需要；一收到众议院方法办法委员会或参议院金融委员会的决定；或基于我们的动议，就进行调查。
期限：USITC一般在收到申请、需要、决定或自己动议后120天内做出损害裁定（更复杂的案子，可以是150天），并且需要将报告与任何救济建议在收到申请、需要、决定或自己动议后180天内递交给总统。
裁定：假如USITC做出一定性裁定，其需要向总统建议补偿方法，假如有救济，由总统决定推行哪种救济手段。救济手段可以是提升关税、数目限制或有序市场协定。
后续安排：假如提供救济，USITC将按期报告在救济期产业内的进步状况。如收到请求，USTIC将建议总统对于正在推行生效的救济进行降低、修改或终止的可能的经济成效。在任何救济期结束的时候，USITC被需要向总统和国会报告救济对于促进国内产业面对进口角逐所做积极调整的成效。
假如在磋商后仍没办法达成双方都认可的结果
假如各方没达成一致，就得寻求WTO争端解决机制的帮忙。关于争端解决的有关协定是《关于争端解决规则和程序的谅解》。对于保障手段，对应的WTO协定是《保障手段协定》。大家将在下一期的经贸博览中对这两个协定，尤其是《保障手段协定》详加讨论，它们对于中国利益重大、至关要紧。
Part 1:
Starting with a Piece of News
Now, let us probe into a piece of news from Peoples Daily dated December 14, 2001.
China Concerns Over US 201 Steel Case
China is strongly concerned over the recent support measures suggested by the US International Trade Commission in the 201 steel case. The USITC published the suggested measures concerning imported steel products based on Section 201 on December 7, which will be referred to President Bush soon, said Gao Yan, spokeswoman of the Chinese Ministry1 of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation .
Gao pointed2 out that most of the USITC commissioners3 suggested to carry on the high import duty and tariff4 quota5 on the steel products under investigation6, which have lasted four years already. The Chinese government is very concerned about this suggestion and the possible result of the 201 investigations7.
According to Gao, the Chinese side holds that the USITC suggestion will bar the steel products of other countries from entering the US market.
Such a barrier would run counter to the policy of trade liberalization advocated by the World Trade Organization（WTO）, and it will not only affect the stability of international trade order under the present conditions of slowed world economic development, but also harm the healthy growth of the US steel enterprises in international competition, said Gao.
On June 28 this year, the USITC started to investigate four types of steel products imported from countries and regions including China.
The investigation was carried out under the Section 201 of the US Trade Act of 1974, aiming to determine whether the imported products would threaten or harm the relevant US domestic industries.
Gao noted8 that China has always objected to trade protectionism in any form, and is unwilling9 to see the normal international trade disturbed by improper10 trade policies and measures. She added that the Chinese government would closely follow the issue, and said that she hoped that the US side would further consider the stances of China and other countries, and handle the issue properly.
After we read this news, several questions come to our minds. Clearly, there is certain problem between China and the US in terms of 201 Steel Case. So what does 201 Steel Case mean? Simply put, it means a case involving steel products under the Section 201 of US Trade Act of 1974. In detail, it is a long story.
Background of 201 Steel Case
Given the marked financial loss and declined profits, returns on investment and market share of the US steel industry, on June 5 2001, the US President Bush announced a comprehensive initiative to respond to the challenges facing the US steel industry. As part of this initiative, the US President directed the US Trade Representative Office to request the US International Trade Commission to initiate11 an investigation under Section 201 of US Trade Act of 1974 of the effect of the steel imports to the US steel industry.
On June 28 2001, the USITC started to investigate four types of steel products imported from countries and regions including China.
On December 19, 2001, the transmitted to the President a report on its investigation under section 202 of the Trade Act of 1974, with respect to imports of certain steel products.
On March 5 2002, the US President Bush announced, in a proclamation, his determination with regard to safeguard measures in various forms on some steel imports to the US from several countries including China.
Section 201 of US Trade Act of 1974
Under section 201, domestic industries seriously injured or threatened with serious injury by increased imports may petition the USITC for import relief. The USITC determines whether an article is being imported in such increased quantities that it is a substantial cause of serious injury, or threat thereof, to the U.S. industry producing an article like or directly competitive with the imported article. If the Commission makes an affirmative determination, it recommends to the President relief that would prevent or remedy the injury and facilitates industry adjustment to import competition. The President makes the final decision whether to provide relief and the amount of relief.
Section 201 does not require a finding of an unfair trade practice, as do the antidumping and countervailing duty laws and section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. However, the injury requirement under section 201 is considered to be more difficult than those of the unfair trade statutes12. Section 201 requires that the injury or threatened injury be serious and that the increased imports must be a substantial cause of the serious injury or threat of serious injury.
Criteria13 for import relief under section 201 are based on those in article XIX of the GATT, as further defined in the WTO Agreement on Safeguards. Article XIX of the GATT is sometimes referred to as the escape clause because it permits a country to escape temporarily from its obligations under the GATT with respect to a particular product when increased imports of that product are causing or are threatening to cause serious injury to domestic producers. Section 201 provides the legal framework under U.S. law for the President to invoke14 U.S. rights under article XIX.
When: The ITC conducts an investigation under section 201 upon receipt of a petition from a trade association, firm, certified15 or recognized union, or group of workers which is representative of a domestic industry; upon receipt of a request from the President or the USTR; upon receipt of a resolution of the House Committee on Ways and Means or Senate Committee on Finance; or upon its own motion.
Duration: The ITC generally must make its injury finding within 120 days of receipt of the petition, request, resolution, or institution on its own motion and must transmit its report to the President, together with any relief recommendations, within 180 days after receipt of the petition, request, resolution, or institution on its own motion.
Finding: If the ITC finding is affirmative, it must recommend a remedy to the President, who determines what relief, if any, will be imposed. Such relief may be in the form of a tariff increase, quantitative16 restrictions17, or orderly marketing18 agreements.
Follow-up: If import relief is provided, the ITC periodically reports on developments within the industry during the period of relief. Upon request, the ITC advises the President of the probable economic effect on the industry of the reduction, modification19, or termination of the relief in effect. At the conclusion of any relief period, the ITC is required to report to the President and Congress on the effectiveness of the relief action in facilitating the positive adjustment of the domestic industry to import competition.
If no mutually satisfactory solution is found after consultations
Well, if parties fail to reach consensus20, Dispute Settlement Body of the WTO is the right place to go. The relevant agreements governing dispute settlement is the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes. With regard to safeguard measures, the relevant WTO agreement is the Agreement on Safeguards.
We are to have a detailed discussion of these two agreements, in particular, the Agreement on Safeguards, which are of great interests and importance to China
