貿易爭端解決機制改革論爭的常態與非常態

The Normal and Abnormal in the Debate on Reform of Trade Dispute Settlement Mechanisms

世界貿易組織上訴機構的嚴重危機事實上源于美國所主導的一場非常態論爭。美方立場與該國時任領導人的個性特質有直接關聯，其理據悖謬且虛偽，呈現歷史偶然性。貿易爭端解決機制改革的常態化論爭則圍繞機制在實踐中展現的結構性弱點而展開，關注的是爭端解決實踐中的真實問題，無論其能否產出有拘束力結果，都不失為一種真誠溝通，這在多邊貿易體制與區域貿易協定兩個層面皆有體現。當前世貿組織成員方應抓住時機，吸收區域貿易協定層面的改革經驗，把握爭端解決機制邁向自治性、效率性、開放性的趨勢，使改革論爭回歸常態化。常態與非常態的沖突本質是傳統機制主義與晚近逆全球化的對壘，歷史偶然性的背后隱藏著一定的必然性，值得高度警醒。

"The serious crisis of the WTO Appellate Body actually stemmed from an abnormal controversy led by the U.S.The U.S.position is directly linked to the personality traits of the country’s then leader,and its rationale is paradoxical,hypocritical and historically contingent.The normal debate on the trade dispute settlement mechanism revolves around the structural weaknesses of the mechanism in practice,and focuses on the real problems in dispute settlement practice,evident as genuine communication at both the multilateral trading system and regional trade agreement levels, regardless of whether they produce binding results. WTO members should now seize the opportunity,learning from the experience of reform at the level of regional trade agreements,grasping the trend of dispute settlement mechanisms towards autonomy,efficiency and openness,to return the reform debate to normality.The conflict between the normal and abnormal is essentially a confrontation between traditional institutionalism and recent de-globalization,and behind the historical contingency lies a certain inevitability which deserves a high degree of caution."