Core Viewpoint - International trade is increasingly vital for Chinese enterprises to expand markets and acquire resources, but it also brings challenges related to the application of international rules and legal risks [1] Group 1: Understanding and Application of International Trade Rules - The understanding of international trade rules by Professor Shen Kehua goes beyond mere textual interpretation, focusing on practical application and risk identification [12] - International trade rules serve as a foundational framework for cross-border business, with dynamic and region-specific applicability [12] - Key tools for enterprises include frameworks like Incoterms and UCP600, which help in delineating responsibilities, controlling risks, and safeguarding property rights [12] Group 2: Training Curriculum Overview - The training curriculum designed by Professor Shen covers critical aspects of international trade, emphasizing practical operations and risk prevention [13] - The first module focuses on the latest revisions of Incoterms®2020, addressing common misconceptions and the implications of term selection on costs and liability [13] - The second module analyzes the impact of geopolitical events on logistics, providing strategies for risk control and dispute resolution [14] - The third module delves into the operational and risk aspects of mainstream settlement methods like TT and L/C, highlighting the importance of due diligence [15] - The fourth module discusses insurance claims processes, particularly in unique transportation scenarios [16] - The fifth module offers interactive Q&A sessions to address typical disputes and emphasizes a comprehensive risk management approach [17] Group 3: Localization and Advantages of Shanghai International Trade Training - The training courses have distinct "Shanghai characteristics" and local advantages, addressing the urgent need for internationalized and specialized training among Shanghai enterprises [18] - The curriculum utilizes real case studies from Chinese enterprises to enhance relevance and engagement [18] - Timely policy interpretations help enterprises comply with changing regulations in import/export controls and foreign exchange [18] - The training is conducted primarily in Chinese, minimizing misunderstandings due to translation or cultural differences [18] Group 4: Importance of Legal Risk Prevention in International Trade - Legal risks in international trade can lead to severe consequences, including financial losses and reputational damage [20] - A systematic legal risk prevention mechanism is essential for enterprises to navigate the complexities of the international environment [20] - The training aims to help enterprises establish a comprehensive risk management system that includes risk anticipation, identification, control, and resolution [20] Conclusion - Professor Shen Kehua is recognized as an authority in the field of international trade training, providing essential knowledge and practical guidance for Chinese enterprises to thrive in global competition [20]

Core Points - The U.S. has resolved an eight-month deadlock with the WTO by paying approximately $25.7 million in overdue fees, despite previous criticisms of the organization by the Trump administration [1][3] - The payment ensures that the U.S. is no longer subject to administrative measures for overdue fees, which could have included various penalties [3][6] - The U.S. is still not restoring the WTO's appellate body, which has been paralyzed since 2019 due to the U.S. blocking the appointment of new judges [3][5] Financial Obligations - The U.S. is required to pay 11% of the WTO's annual budget, which is approximately 205 million Swiss Francs (around $25.7 million) for 2024 [3] - The overdue fees had significant implications for the WTO's operations, leading to budget constraints and a reduction in technical assistance to developing countries [6][7] U.S. Participation in WTO - Despite the payment, the U.S. continues to undermine the WTO's dispute resolution capabilities by blocking the selection of appellate body members [4][5] - The U.S. is engaging in WTO technical work at an administrative level, indicating a selective approach to participation rather than a fundamental strategy shift [6][7] - Experts suggest that the U.S. payment is more about maintaining control over the WTO rather than a genuine commitment to reforming the organization [6][7]

Group 1 - German Foreign Minister Baerbock's planned visit to China has been postponed due to insufficient meetings arranged in China, which highlights the importance of China in trade and international affairs [1] - The visit was originally scheduled to start on the 26th and was intended to address export control issues related to rare earths and semiconductors, emphasizing the need for stable and reliable global trade relations [1] - Baerbock expressed that Germany aims to maintain close economic ties with China, stating that "decoupling" is not the correct strategy [1] Group 2 - Baerbock reiterated Germany's commitment to the One China policy while emphasizing that Germany will decide its policy implementation independently and does not support the use of force to change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait [2] - China's Foreign Ministry responded by stating that the greatest threat to peace in the Taiwan Strait is "Taiwan independence" and external forces supporting it, urging Germany to uphold the One China principle [2] - A commentary from German media suggested that Baerbock should adopt a more curious and learning-oriented approach towards China, rather than a punitive one, which could benefit Germany's export sector [2]

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes that the U.S. approach of imposing high tariffs and trade restrictions on China is not the correct way to handle bilateral relations, and it calls for a rational and pragmatic dialogue to maintain global supply chain stability [1][2][3][4]. Group 1: U.S.-China Trade Relations - The U.S. has implemented multiple trade restrictions against China, including adding Chinese entities to export control lists and expanding the scope of these controls, which negatively impacts thousands of Chinese companies [1][2]. - The U.S. actions are seen as damaging to the atmosphere of trade talks and disrupting international trade rules, leading to adverse effects on bilateral economic relations [1][2]. Group 2: China's Export Control Measures - China's export control measures on rare earths and related items are framed as a responsible action to maintain national and international security, especially given their importance in military applications [2]. - The number of items on China's export control list is approximately 900, while the U.S. has over 3,000 items, highlighting a disparity in the application of export controls [2]. Group 3: Call for Dialogue and Cooperation - China maintains a clear stance of being open to dialogue while also prepared to respond firmly to any actions that harm its interests, emphasizing the need for mutual respect and cooperation [3][4]. - A recent survey indicates that a majority of American respondents view U.S. protectionist policies as a significant barrier, suggesting a public desire for reduced tariffs and increased trade facilitation [4].

Core Viewpoint - Recent actions by China regarding rare earth exports and technology controls have sparked global attention, indicating a significant shift in international trade rules and geopolitical dynamics [1][3] Group 1: China's Position in Rare Earth Market - China is the largest producer of rare earth elements, controlling approximately 90% of high-purity rare earth production capacity, which underscores its substantial influence in the market [1] - The recent export control measures by China encompass raw materials, technology, and equipment across multiple segments of the industry, even affecting products processed in third countries, leading to a comprehensive "blockade" strategy [1] Group 2: Netherlands' Actions and Implications - The Dutch government has taken measures against China's Wingtech Technology, freezing assets of its subsidiary, ASML, in 30 global entities, signaling a provocative stance against China and a violation of international trade norms [3] - The actions taken by the Netherlands are seen as a response to the broader U.S.-EU strategy to curb China's technological advancements, indicating a shift in how commercial issues are being politicized [3][5] Group 3: Impact on International Investment Environment - The intertwining of commercial and political issues is reshaping the international investment landscape, potentially leading to increased "political risks" for Chinese companies' overseas assets [5] - The current global economic recovery phase makes the protection of Chinese assets abroad a pressing concern for both political and business leaders, especially in high-tech sectors [5] Group 4: China's Strategic Response - China is expected to utilize legal, diplomatic, and public opinion strategies to defend its rights, challenging arbitrary actions taken under the guise of "national security" [7] - Emphasizing technological independence and internal development of the supply chain is crucial for China to counter Western technological blockades [7] - China should actively participate in reshaping international rules to ensure fair and equitable development for all nations, moving away from historically unfavorable multilateral trade rules [7]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the United States' role in the World Trade Organization (WTO), highlighting its self-proclaimed status as a founding member while simultaneously undermining the organization's rules when they no longer serve its interests [1][5]. Group 1: U.S. Actions and Criticism - A Canadian scholar labeled the U.S. as a "trade rogue," criticizing its return to protectionist policies reminiscent of the Great Depression, and suggested expelling the U.S. from the WTO [3]. - Since 2018, the U.S. has frequently violated international trade rules, raising tariffs and obstructing the appointment of judges to the WTO's appellate body, effectively paralyzing its dispute resolution mechanism [5]. - The U.S. has threatened to withdraw from the WTO while simultaneously attempting to control its budget and influence personnel appointments, turning the organization into a platform that primarily serves U.S. interests [5][8]. Group 2: Challenges of Expulsion - The possibility of expelling the U.S. from the WTO is virtually impossible due to the lack of a mechanism for collective expulsion, as outlined in the Marrakesh Agreement [6]. - Despite discussions in Congress about potential withdrawal, there has been no definitive outcome, indicating that the U.S. is unlikely to leave the WTO voluntarily [6][9]. - The U.S. remains the largest player in the WTO, making it difficult for other countries to effectively respond to its rule-breaking behavior [9]. Group 3: EU's Response and Future Implications - The EU is developing a "Plan B" to establish a new multilateral dispute resolution mechanism, indicating a growing discontent with the current WTO structure under U.S. influence [8]. - The U.S. has been dismantling key pillars of the WTO, such as the most-favored-nation treatment and the dispute resolution mechanism, which has led to a collapse of these systems [8]. - The U.S.'s imposition of a 50% tariff in 2025 serves as a final ultimatum to other countries, emphasizing its willingness to escalate tensions if its demands are not met [8].

Core Viewpoint - Japan's Finance Minister, Kato Katsunobu, stated that Japan cannot impose tariffs on countries importing Russian oil from the perspective of international law [1][3]. Group 1: International Trade Commitments - Japan's stance is based on its commitments under the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework, which requires fair treatment of all member countries and adherence to agreed-upon tariff limits [3]. - Japan has decided not to follow the U.S. in imposing tariffs on imported Russian oil, indicating a careful balance between international rules and national interests [3]. Group 2: Global Trade Implications - Japan recognizes that adhering to international trade rules is crucial for its long-term development within the global trade system [3]. - Some commentators noted that Japan's position aligns with China's previous statements on the legality of normal economic cooperation between China and Russia, reflecting a broader international consensus against economic coercion [3].

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]

Core Viewpoint - The international shipping industry is crucial for global trade, with 90% of goods traded by sea, representing 60% of the total trade value, approximately $40 trillion [1] Group 1: Importance of Shipping Industry - The shipping industry consists of around 10,000 companies and 60,000 to 70,000 vessels, with 60% of shipping capacity serving developing economies [1] - Simon Bennett emphasized the need for public awareness of the shipping industry's significance, likening its importance to that of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) [1] Group 2: International Trade Rules - Simon Bennett stated that shipping is a high-cost industry, with a large container ship potentially incurring fuel costs of up to $25 million annually, excluding crew and insurance costs [2] - Stable trade systems and predictable trade policies are essential for the industry's development, especially given the volatility in freight rates due to global economic conditions [2] - Tan Hung Seng highlighted Singapore's role as a major trade hub, with a projected cargo throughput of 622 million tons in 2024, 90% of which will be for transshipment [2] Group 3: Carbon Emission Regulations - The unification of carbon taxes and regulatory frameworks is a significant concern for the shipping industry [3] - Tan Hung Seng discussed the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and the need for an international framework to support carbon reduction without imposing excessive burdens on businesses [4] Group 4: Supply Chain Diversification and Technology - Marie-Caroline Laurent noted that many clients are diversifying their supply chains, which reflects a restructuring rather than a decrease in globalization [5] - The shipping industry is leveraging digitalization and technological advancements to improve efficiency, potentially reducing fuel consumption by 10% to 20% [5] - Automation and technological innovations are also being utilized to alleviate port congestion, a persistent issue in the industry [5]

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].