加拿大一位学者的言论引起了广泛关注。2025年7月7日，加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚大学教授克里斯汀·霍普韦尔直言不讳，称美国是"贸易流氓"。她还批评美 国的做法，不仅像是回到了大萧条时期的"斯穆特-霍利关税"政策，甚至应该把美国踢出WTO。两天后，美国便宣布要对欧盟的商品加征50%关税，理由 是"国家安全"，这完全是利用WTO规则的漏洞，任意翻脸。 美国从2018年开始频繁破坏国际贸易规则，不仅提高关税，还用各种手段限制其他国家的发展。最具破坏性的是，2016年底开始，美国就阻挠WTO上诉机 构法官的任命，直到2019年，直接让WTO争端解决机制"瘫痪"。这样一来，美国不受任何约束，几乎成了国际贸易的"霸主"。甚至在2025年，美国政府明 确表示要暂停交WTO会费，研究是否彻底退出WTO。 然而，美国的做法并不是简单的退出，它一边威胁退出，一边通过控制WTO的预算、影响人员任命，甚至绕过争端解决机制，使整个组织几乎在其掌控之 下。WTO的规则和程序本来是为了保障公平的，但在美国的操控下，它变成了一个只听美国指挥的平台。欧盟甚至在考虑是否要单独建立一个替代WTO的 机制。 但问题是，是否真能把美国"踢出"WTO呢？答 ...

日本刚刚宣布不跟随美国对进口俄石油加征关税。这一决策反映出日本在国际规则与自身利益之间进行了权衡。日本深知遵循国际贸易规则，对其自身在全 球贸易体系中的长远发展至关重要。 部分网友提到，中国外交部此前已明确表示中俄正常经贸合作合法合规，日本的立场与国际社会反对经济胁迫的主流态度一致，印证了"胁迫施压不得人 心"的事实 。 10月3日，日本财务大臣加藤胜信明确表态，从遵守国际法的角度出发，日本无法对进口俄罗斯石油的国家提高关税 。 这一立场的核心依据是日本在世界贸易组织框架下的承诺——只要其他成员国履行世贸组织协议义务，日本便不会征收超出规定限度的关税，且需公平对待 所有成员国 。 各位读者对此怎么看 欢迎评论区留言 ...

Group 1 - The G7 summit concluded with President Trump urging traditional allies like Japan and Germany to impose high tariffs on goods from China and India, ranging from 50% to 100% [1][3] - Japan's Finance Minister, Taro Kato, stated that Japan would not impose additional tariffs on China and India, citing World Trade Organization (WTO) rules as a defense [5][7] - Japan emphasized the principles of most-favored-nation treatment and non-discrimination under WTO rules, arguing that raising tariffs based solely on energy trade with Russia is prohibited [9] Group 2 - Japan's refusal to comply with Trump's demands reflects its deep economic ties with China, as evidenced by a nearly balanced trade volume of $206.4 billion in the first eight months of 2025 [10] - Historical lessons from the Plaza Accord in 1985, which led to Japan's economic stagnation, have influenced Japan's current independent stance on economic policies [12] - Japan's energy security strategy includes diversifying energy sources, with Russian energy imports being a key component, while also preparing to increase purchases from other regions [14] Group 3 - The political environment in Japan, particularly the impending resignation of Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, has provided a favorable context for rejecting U.S. demands [14] - China's strong opposition to unilateral sanctions and potential retaliatory measures has also played a crucial role in Japan's decision [15] - The U.S. has not immediately retaliated against Japan's refusal, indicating the complexity of U.S.-Japan relations and the ongoing security cooperation between the two nations [17] Group 4 - Japan's decision to reject Trump's tariff demands may signal a shift in global trade dynamics, where even close allies begin to prioritize national interests and international rules over blind allegiance [19]

他半开玩笑的说，"有一种说法是，没有航运，这个世界的一半会饿死，另一半会冻死"，以形象解 释国际航运的重要性。 9月18日，在2025世贸组织公共论坛中，国际航运领域的专家探讨了目前行业最关心的诸多话题， 从国际贸易规则，到碳减排，以及数字科技给航运领域所带来的新发展机遇。 国际航运公会（ICS）副秘书长Simon Bennett呼吁公众多一些对航运行业的关注。他解释说，2024 年，目前126亿吨重的全球货品都是通过海运集装箱运输，占全球货物贸易总量的九成，全球货品贸易 总价值的六成，约合40万亿美元。 在此之外，碳稅和监管框架的统一也是海运产业很关心的话题。 Tan Hung Seng大使认为，当下贸易和可持续已经是两个内在高度互联的话题。 "目前欧洲所采取的CBAM，即计划与明年开始实施的'欧盟碳边境调整机制'，就是在这种趋势下 应运而生。"Tan Hung Seng大使说，"减碳话题已经是公共板块和私人板块共同认可的趋势，新加坡也 是坚定的支持碳减排和可持续发展。然而，减碳需要一个国际性的统一框架，也要考虑到对企业运营成 本的影响。在CBAM实施的过程中，就要考虑到这机制是否和每个欧盟国家国内的政策相 ...

Core Viewpoint - The international shipping industry is crucial for global trade, with 90% of goods transported by sea, highlighting the need for stable international trade rules and regulations [3][5]. Group 1: Importance of Shipping Industry - In 2024, 12.6 billion tons of global goods will be transported via container shipping, accounting for 90% of global trade volume and 60% of trade value, approximately $40 trillion [3]. - The shipping industry consists of around 10,000 shipping companies and 60,000 to 70,000 vessels, with 60% of shipping capacity serving developing economies [3][5]. Group 2: Need for International Trade Rules - The shipping industry faces high operational costs, with a large container ship potentially incurring fuel costs of up to $25 million annually, excluding crew and insurance costs [5]. - A stable trade system and predictable trade policies are essential for the industry's development, especially given the volatility in freight rates due to global economic conditions [5]. Group 3: Role of Singapore in Global Trade - Singapore is a major trade hub, with its port projected to handle 622 million tons of cargo in 2024, 90% of which will be for transshipment [5]. - The economy of Singapore heavily relies on imports, with import trade accounting for 300% of its GDP, making the global trade system vital for its economic health [5]. Group 4: Carbon Tax and Regulatory Framework - The shipping industry is concerned about the unification of carbon tax and regulatory frameworks, with the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) being a significant topic [6][7]. - A unified international framework for carbon reduction is necessary to avoid multiple carbon tax charges and ensure compatibility with WTO rules, preventing increased burdens on businesses [7]. Group 5: Supply Chain Diversification and Digitalization - Companies are diversifying their supply chains in response to new international trade dynamics, indicating a restructuring rather than a decrease in globalization [8]. - Digitalization and technological advancements are enhancing efficiency in the shipping industry, potentially reducing fuel consumption by 10% to 20% and alleviating port congestion through automation [10].

Group 1 - The United States is pressuring G7 countries to impose high tariffs on China and India, citing their purchase of Russian oil as support for Russia's wartime economy [1][3][5] - European countries, including Germany and France, are hesitant to follow the U.S. lead due to potential negative impacts on their economies, particularly in sectors like automotive and luxury goods [8][10] - The UK has taken a different approach by sending a large delegation to China, signaling a desire to strengthen economic ties and suggesting a potential thaw in UK-China relations [5][6][10] Group 2 - The G7 countries are not unified in their response to U.S. demands, with each member considering their own economic interests before agreeing to impose tariffs on China [8][10] - Canada is also cautious about aligning with the U.S. on tariffs, recognizing that it could harm its own economic position in international trade [8][10] - Japan, while politically aligned with the U.S., is wary of the economic repercussions of high tariffs on its trade relationship with China [8][10]

Group 1 - The 138th Canton Fair promotion event was attended by the Consul Wang Chengguang from the Chinese Consulate in Auckland, along with representatives from various trade associations and local business sectors [1][3] - Former New Zealand Prime Minister Michael Moore described China's entry into the WTO as a "great historical event," highlighting China's integration into the global trade system and its role as a major trading partner for over 150 countries, including New Zealand [3] - The current international trade rules are facing unprecedented challenges, yet China's foreign trade demonstrates strong resilience, with the Canton Fair serving as a significant platform for open cooperation [3] Group 2 - Attendees expressed their commitment to leveraging the Canton Fair as a high-quality platform to achieve mutual benefits and win-win outcomes [5]

Core Insights - The Canadian government's unfriendly policies towards China have severely impacted Canadian farmers, particularly in the canola sector, which previously had an export value of CAD 5 billion (approximately RMB 260.5 billion) to China [1] - China's decision to impose a 75.8% deposit on Canadian canola is a direct response to ongoing pressure from Canada, highlighting the consequences of political maneuvering in trade [3][5] - The loss of the Chinese market has significant implications for Canadian farmers and related industries, leading to potential income drops and job losses in the canola sector [6][8] Industry Impact - The canola industry in Western Canada is crucial for thousands of livelihoods, and the loss of the Chinese market will likely result in a price drop for canola, affecting farmers' incomes and leading to layoffs in oil processing plants [6][8] - China's swift pivot to Australia for canola procurement demonstrates its adaptability in the global market and signals the importance of maintaining trust and cooperation in international trade [3][6] Strategic Lessons - The situation serves as a warning to other nations about the risks of treating economic interests as political leverage, emphasizing the need for rational decision-making and adherence to market principles [8][10] - Canada must recognize the severity of its current predicament and consider strategic adjustments to re-establish communication and cooperation with China to regain market share [8][10]

Group 1 - The core point of the article highlights the significant trade agreements made by the Trump administration, particularly the $450 billion deal with South Korea, which includes $350 billion in investments in core U.S. projects and $100 billion in energy procurement [1][3] - The total value of trade agreements reached by the Trump administration with Japan, the EU, and South Korea in one month amounts to $2.35 trillion, indicating a dramatic restructuring of the global trade landscape [1][3] - The South Korean government has strategically preserved its agricultural markets by not opening rice and beef markets to the U.S., showcasing a balance between economic negotiations and domestic interests [3] Group 2 - The South Korean won experienced a brief increase of 0.4% following the agreement, but quickly fell back, suggesting market skepticism about the underlying implications of the deal [4] - The article critiques the nature of the agreements, noting that a significant portion of the promised investments from Japan and the EU are not direct investments but rather loans or guarantees, raising questions about the actual economic benefits [6][7] - The U.S. is leveraging exaggerated figures to create a facade of victory in trade negotiations, while allies are participating in this arrangement to secure tariff reductions [7] Group 3 - Specific allocations from the agreements include $150 billion for U.S.-Korea shipbuilding cooperation, $200 billion for sectors like semiconductors and nuclear energy, and a commitment to purchase $100 billion of U.S. liquefied natural gas over three and a half years [8] - The article discusses the implications of the U.S. imposing a 40% tariff on Brazil, highlighting the uneven impact of U.S. trade policies on different countries and the limited options for Brazil to retaliate [10] - The U.S. has shown a different approach towards China, extending a 90-day pause on tariff measures, indicating a more complex and nuanced trade relationship compared to other nations [12][16] Group 4 - The article notes that while tariff revenues appear substantial, they are insufficient to cover the rising national debt, with the U.S. Treasury expecting to borrow $1.01 trillion, nearly double previous estimates [14] - The Federal Reserve's cautious stance on interest rates reflects the economic challenges posed by the trade policies, as the U.S. grapples with balancing inflation control and economic growth [14] - The overarching theme suggests that the aggressive trade tactics employed by the Trump administration may lead to long-term economic consequences, as allies and adversaries alike reassess their positions in the global trade system [16]

Group 1 - The U.S. Department of Commerce announced a 93.5% anti-dumping tax on Chinese exports of anode-grade graphite, citing unfair subsidies as the reason for the tax [1][3] - China is the largest producer of graphite globally, with northeastern and Shandong regions accounting for over 60% of the international market, primarily used in lithium batteries and electric arc furnace steel production [3] - The sudden increase in tax rates poses challenges for U.S. companies that rely on Chinese suppliers for battery materials, potentially leading to higher costs for end consumers [3][4] Group 2 - U.S. domestic graphite reserves rank among the top three globally, but extraction costs are twice as high as those in China, which may lead to cost savings for U.S. companies while increasing prices for consumers [3] - Chinese exporters are urgently seeking alternative suppliers from Russia and Mongolia, although these options come with risks related to transportation and quality [3] - Legal experts suggest that China could apply for a review under WTO rules, but the process could take at least a year and a half, during which companies may need to raise prices or explore third-country markets [3] Group 3 - Several graphite manufacturers in Shandong are discussing strategies, including relocating production to Malaysia or applying for separate tax rates, although these options involve high costs and stricter environmental regulations in Southeast Asia [3] - Some companies are considering developing higher value-added graphene products to avoid low-end competition [3] - The situation may indirectly affect consumers, as the cost of raw materials for electric vehicle batteries could rise, potentially impacting new car prices [4]