At WTO, Japan Demands China, Hong Kong and Taiwan to Drop Their Food Import Bans after Fukushima Nuclear Accident Because "Any Contaminated Products Can Not Be Traded" in Japan

China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan continue to ban food import from Japan after the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident, and Japan doesn't like it. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has pledged in his "growth strategy" that he wants to make Japanese agriculture "strong". One of the clear gauges of this "strength" is apparently how much agricultural products Japan can export, particularly from the nuclear-disaster-affected Tohoku and Kanto. So his government used a committee at the World Trade Organization to demand these three countries drop the bans.

Country-specific restrictions should be based on science, Japan and WTO say.

First, from Jiji Tsushin (6/29/2013):

農産品の輸入規制撤回を＝日本、ＷＴＯで中国などに要請

　【ジュネーブ時事】日本政府は２８日まで開かれた世界貿易機関（ＷＴＯ）の衛生検疫委員会で、東京電力福島第１原発事故を受け、日本産農産物などに対する輸入規制を続けている中国、香港、台湾に対し、規制措置の是正を求めた。これまでは特定国の名指しを避けてきたが、規制が長期化しているため、強い懸念を示した形だ。

In the meeting of the WTO’s Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Committee that ended on June 28, the Japanese government demanded China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan to correct (revise) the import restrictions on Japanese agricultural products. The countries continue to place the import restrictions following the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident. The Japanese government had refrained from naming the countries, but used the opportunity to express strong concern as the import restrictions from these countries have been going on too long.

　食品の安全性に関しては、国際的な衛生検疫基準に加え、各国の独自判断も認められている。その場合は科学的根拠に基づく健康などへのリスク評価が必要となる。

Regarding the food safety, in addition to the international sanitary and phytosanitary measures, countries are allowed to use their own judgment. In the latter case, the health risk evaluation based on scientific evidence would be necessary.

The WTO's meeting was in part to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Codex Alimentarius, a controversial collection of internationally recognized standards, codes of practice, guidelines and other recommendations relating to foods, food production and food safety.

It is amusing for the Japanese to insist on scientific evidence at this point, but that's what they did at WTO.

From WTO's press release (6/28/2013; emphasis is mine):

WTO members celebrated the 50th anniversary of 186-member Codex Alimentarius, which sets international standards for food safety, by calling, on 27–28 June 2013, for continued support for the body, and for trade measures to be based on science.

The calls came in a two-day meeting of the WTO’s Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Committee, which consists of all 159 WTO members and deals with food safety and animal and plant health — measures having an increasing impact on trade.

They echoed a paper circulated by Brazil (document G/SPS/GEN/1253), which described food safety as an important contributor to food security, and said international standards and guidelines should be based on science, that confidence in Codex and other international standards-setting bodies should be strengthened, and that any measures that apply higher standards should also be justified by science.

“The increase in the number of SPS measures that are not based on international standards, guidelines and recommendations, or that lack scientific justification, is a point of concern that has often been raised by many members in the SPS Committee and other contexts,” Brazil observed.

A political body like WTO insisting on science. Fantastic.

So, if people in the world don't want to eat food that contains more than normal amount of radioactive cesium, or don't want to eat genetically-modified food, both of which are supposedly proven "safe", what does WTO do? Force-feed them?

From the same press release, Japan's specific concern:

Import restrictions in response to Japan’s nuclear power plant accident.

Japan updated members on the latest situation and said radiation levels are generally within normal safety levels, and that any contaminated products could not be traded. Many trading partners have lifted their import restrictions, Japan said. However, restrictions remain in Hong Kong China and Chinese Taipei although Japan is starting to work with them on analysing the situation. China remains a major trading partner that still has import bans and Japan has not been able to discuss this bilaterally, Japan said. China said that only products from seriously polluted areas are affected.

Just by looking at the daily updates by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, and periodic updates from municipal governments, not to mention citizens' groups, it is easy to note that food items being sold on the market in Japan continue to be found with radioactive cesium. The levels may be below 100 Bq/kg in most cases, but they are actively "traded", contrary to the Japanese government's claim.

I do not know what "normal safety levels" for the radiation levels in Japan at this point, but judging by the way the national government is trying to return the evacuees in the former "no-entry" evacuation zones, as long as the annual external radiation exposure is less than 20 millisieverts, it is safe. (More in later post.)

After the March 11, 2011 triple disaster, people in Taiwan collected and donated a large amount of money (second-largest, in fact, almost the same as the US, at 2.9 billion yen) to help people in the disaster affected Japan. China, in addition to monetary donation (920 million yen), offered the Putzmeister crane to be used at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant. Hong Kong gave 700 million yen to Japan.

And Japan turns around and use the WTO to force them to drop the food bans. Not a way to treat generous neighbors.

Tweet

Japan's PM Noda Demands WTO Do Something About "Baseless Rumors"

What would WTO do? Force countries to buy Japanese produce to "share the pain"?

From Jiji Tsushin (3/15/2012):

ＷＴＯに風評被害阻止を要請＝首相

Prime Minister requests WTO to block "baseless rumors"

　野田佳彦首相は１５日、首相官邸で世界貿易機関（ＷＴＯ）のラミー事務局長と会談した。首相は、東京電力福島第１原発事故に伴い、日本食品の厳しい輸入制限を行う国が依然多いと指摘。ＷＴＯに対し、ルールにのっとった公正な取り扱いを呼び掛けるよう要請した。

Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda met with Mr. Pascal Lamy, Director-General of the World Trade Organization (WTO) at the Prime Minister's Official Residence. The prime minister pointed out that there were still many countries with import restriction on food items from Japan after the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident, and requested that WTO call for a fair treatment based on the rules.

　これに対し、ラミー事務局長は「ＷＴＯを積極的に活用してほしい。プロセスなどに問題があれば、事務局長としても役割を果たしたい」と応じた。

Mr. Lamy said to the prime minister, "Please feel free to use WTO. If there are problems in the process I will intervene as Director-General. "

WTO is all but dead, with the contentious Doha Round going nowhere for 10 years.

Tweet

WHO Wants to Tax Everyone on the Planet

Just about.

U.N.'s World Health Organization Eyeing Global Tax on Banking, Internet Activity (George Russell, 1/16/2010 Fox News)

"The World Health Organization (WHO) is considering a plan to ask governments to impose a global consumer tax on such things as Internet activity or everyday financial transactions like paying bills online.

"Such a scheme could raise "tens of billions of dollars" on behalf of the United Nation's public health arm from a broad base of consumers, which would then be used to transfer drug-making research, development and manufacturing capabilities, among other things, to the developing world.

"The multibillion-dollar "indirect consumer tax" is only one of a "suite of proposals" for financing the rapid transformation of the global medical industry that will go before WHO's 34-member supervisory Executive Board at its biannual meeting in Geneva.

"... WHO's so-called Expert Working Group has also suggested asking rich countries to set aside fixed portions of their gross domestic product to finance the shift in worldwide research and development, as well as asking cash-rich developing nations like China, India or Venezuela to pony up more of the money." (The article continues.)

UN/WHO wants rich countries (i.e. developed countries who are not so rich any more) to set aside fixed portions of GDP to give to the poor countries under the guise of "global medical research and development". But that's not all. UN/WHO wants to tax citizens of the world, just about all of them.

How? This is from the executive summary of the scheme by WHO Executive Board, dated December 23, 2009 (page 9):

• a 10% tax on the international arms trade market, which might net about $5 billion per annum

• a digital tax or 'bit' tax [Fox article misquotes it as 'hit' tax]: Internet traffic is huge and likely to increase rapidly; this tax could yield tens of billions of U.S. dollars from a broad base of users
  
  
• Brazil's financial transaction tax: a tax on bank account transaction, set at 0.38% levied on paying bills online and major withdrawals, it was raising an estimated US$20 billion per year and funding some 87% of the Government's key social protection programme, before it was voted down [Good for Brazilians to vote that down!]
  
  
• UNITAID airline tax: an international solidarity micro-levy is well accepted by the public and causes no economic distortion [Solidarity levy on airline tickets raises almost all US$300 million UNITAID revenue.]
  

'Bit' tax proposal is nothing new. Back in 1999 during Clinton Administration, UN/WHO proposed the 'bit' tax to levy 1 cent per every 100 emails sent. They are at it again, and this time they may get away with it, at least in the U.S. where the proposals to tax every trade on financial instruments (stocks, options, futures, derivatives, etc.) and to tax the liabilities of nation's top 50 financial institutions are being considered and may be gaining support among the naive Congress who seem to think striking such a populist image would win them the support from their constituents. Both proposals are absurd, and will end up punishing the purported victims to be saved (i.e. the general public).

So, for the sake of transferring further wealth from developed and rich developing countries to the poor countries, everyone in the world who has Internet access and/or email account can be taxed. If your email account is hacked and someone is sending a million spam mails from your account, good luck to you. If you withdraw a chunk of money from your bank, you will be taxed. If you pay your bill online from your bank account, you will be taxed. If you fly, you will be forced to show international solidarity by paying additional airport tax.

I do not like the fact that these are being proposed by a supra-national organization like UN and WHO. IMF, another supra-national organization, has already floated the idea of global financial transaction tax. INTERPOL, whose U.S. branch is located within the U.S. Justice Department, now has full diplomatic immunity within the U.S. soil, thanks to President Obama. Though rebuffed for now, the Obama administration is pushing the new tax on financial institutions to be adopted worldwide. There is some uneasy theme here, isn't there?

Will it ever stop? We the proverbial frogs in a pot are being boiled very quickly and the heat are getting too uncomfortable. Will we able to stop this insanity?

Tweet