Le rôle de la Chine et de l’OMC dans le développement des Considérations Autres que Commerciales pour régler le commerce mondial de façon plus juste et durable (The Role of China and of the WTO for the Development of the Non-Trade Concerns to Regulate the World Trade in a More Just and Durable Way)

French Abstract: De Seattle en 1999 a Occupy Wall Street en 2011, la societe civile n’a cesse de manifester son desarroi et sa colere face aux consequences humaines, sociales et environnementales de l’extension planetaire du commerce mondial et de la traduction en termes quantitatifs, monetaires et marchands de l’ensemble des transactions interpersonnelles. Pour autant, depuis le debut de la revolution industrielle le succes du mode capitaliste de production semble atteste par ses resultats tangibles en termes de developpement demographique, technologique et economique. Entre 1810 et 2010, le revenu global par personne a ete multiplie par neuf, la population mondiale a ete multipliee par six et le rythme des innovations technologiques a cru de facon exponentielle (train, avion, internet, etc.). Cependant deux bemols importants doivent etre apportes quant a l’efficacite et la legitimite du mode industriel de production de biens et du mode marchand de distribution des richesses en leur extension mondiale. Le premier bemol est que le developpement mondial du mode industriel de production des biens a eu pour effet de bouleverser l’equilibre ecosystemique qui regule l’interaction entre l’homme et son environnement: changement climatique, epuisement des ressources halieutiques, erosion des sols et pollution atmospherique forment l’envers de la medaille du triomphe mondial de la revolution industrielle. Dire que le mode actuel de developpement est non-soutenable selon signifie que sa continuation entrainera en meme temps son extinction: le developpement humain a pour limite exogene finie la capacite de production, d’absorption et de recyclage de la Terre. Le second bemol est que le developpement mondial du mode marchand de distribution des richesses a cree un paradoxal renforcement des inegalites. Des lors, l’idee de limiter les exces de la globalisation en meme temps que de controler les institutions internationales qui les mettent en place comme le FMI ou l’OMC peut se justifier a certains egards. English Abstract: The delocalization of production appears to be the sole response to the increasing competitive pressure exerted by low-cost producers on European firms. While this delocalization has resulted in loss of employment for European citizens within the EU, it may have a corrosive impact on the core societal values both in EU and in the host country. Both public opinion and policy makers fear that international trade, in particular a further liberalization thereof, may undermine or jeopardize policies and measures on a wide variety of issues, for example, the protection the environment and the sustainable development, good governance, cultural rights, labor rights, public health, social welfare, national security, food safety, access to knowledge, consumer interests and animal welfare. There is a general consensus that these non-trade concerns, which cover very different societal aspirations and fears, must be addressed in EU external policy and in particular measures relating to international trade and foreign direct investment. There is also the expectation that the EU should act in all the international arenas to defend and keep these values at the highest level of protection. However, many of the trade measures introduced by developed countries to address non-trade concerns have been met by developing countries with cautious distrust if not with resistance or dissent. Developing countries, including China, often doubt the authenticity of such concerns that can be inspired by protectionist aims, rather than genuine non-trade concerns. Moreover, developing countries see these measures as an attempt by developed countries to impose their social, ethical or cultural values and preferences on exporting developing countries. Given the different and sometimes opposing interests of developing and industrialized countries, one may question whether international economic law may become a fairer system. If all the countries negotiated in international fora having always in mind the general common interests of the humanity as a whole, this would be the case. Unfortunately this is not the case: this is the reason why this project is timely and necessary. Amongst the new emerging economies, China is already playing a key role in drawing new rules of the game and it is important to evaluate, without prejudice and by taking into consideration its special context, China’s behavior internally and externally to understand which direction the world is being driven in by China.