United States – Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea (US–OCTG (Korea)), DS488

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 353-360
Author(s):  
Kholofelo Kugler

The dispute relates to anti-dumping measures imposed by the United States (US) on oil country tubular goods (OCTG) imported from the Republic of Korea (Korea). Korea challenged the ‘laws, regulations, administrative procedures and other measures’ through which the US maintains a ‘viability test’ in anti-dumping investigations, administrative reviews, and other aspects of anti-dumping proceedings ‘as such’ and ‘as applied’ in the underlying investigation in this dispute. Korea also challenged certain aspects of the final anti-dumping measure that was applied by the US on imports of Korean OCTG subsequent to a final determination of dumping by the US Department of Commerce (USDOC) in the underlying investigation. Moreover, Korea challenged certain conduct of the USDOC during the course of the investigation at issue. Finally, Korea challenged the USDOC's remand determination of 22 February 2016 that was issued while the current dispute was pending before the panel. This determination was taken by the USDOC subsequent to a review conducted by the US Court of International Trade (USCIT) on the final determination challenged by Korea in this dispute. The USCIT found aspects of the final determination to be inconsistent with US law and remanded that final determination to the USDOC to cure the relevant inconsistencies.

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomonori Ishida

AbstractIn January 1983, Japan finalized an economic assistance agreement with the Republic of Korea (ROK), pledging to extend $4 billion in economic aid to the country concerned. Prior to the finalization of the agreement, both countries held rounds of negotiation on the aid package conditions, and this led to them entering into a period of growing political friction. Despite this, a political consensus was eventually hammered out in 1983 over their disagreement, and this had a far-reaching effect in stabilizing the political relationship between the countries. Substantial academic research has been carried out on this topic, but the reasons behind Japan’s commitment to rounds of political negotiation with the ROK have yet to be positively analyzed and convincingly substantiated. In light of this fact, the main aim of this article is to analyze the motivational forces that brought Japan to the negotiating table with the ROK. More specifically, it focuses on analyzing the effects of the formalization process of the US-Japan agreement that served to induce Japan to address the ROK-aid negotiation issue conscientiously. The analysis reveals clearly that the major factor that spurred Japan to revisit its ROK’s aid package conditions was Japan’s concern over its security burden-sharing scheme with the United States. It is likely that in July 1981, in his summit meeting with President Ronald Reagan, Prime Minister Suzuki Zenkō pledged to initiate official talks with the ROK in response to the ROK’s request for an extended economic aid package. In tracing the course of US-Japan political negotiations from the period between 1977 and the formalization of the ROK’s aid agreement, this analysis reveals that the United States and Japan were of one mind concerning the need for the agreement as one of the critical means of resolving a myriad of their security concerns. It is also shown, however, that the countries arrived at their shared view from different perspectives, which were politically beneficial to their own interests. On the one hand, the United States expected Japan to assume greater responsibilities in security burden sharing, in line with its global economic status. On the other hand, partly because of the political limitations of shouldering a regional security role, Japan’s primary concern was to minimize its share of security burdens as far as possible and in such a way as not to disrupt its harmonious relationship with the United States. On top of this, insofar as the United States was concerned, it seemed to be unwise to request that Japan overshare the bilateral security defense expenditure, which might be detrimental to its political stability at home and at the same time might affect the credibility of their security alliance. In sum, the article shows that the consensus on aid for the ROK was beneficial to both Japan and the United States in terms of resolving their differences in the political operation of their security alliance scheme, including burden-sharing responsibilities. This was the real reason for Japan’s commitment to revisit its economic aid package with the ROK.


2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 421-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno G. Simões ◽  
Tobias Dolle

On 5 February 2016, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (hereinafter, NOAA),within the United States (hereinafter, US) Department of Commerce, published a Proposed Rule to create a seafood traceability programme. The programme intends to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated (hereinafter, IUU) fishing, prevent fraudulent trade and to serve as the contribution of the US to the global action to combat IUU fishing, along the lines of other similar regulatory frameworks, such as the EU's extensive regulationon IUU fishing. However, despite the legitimate objectives of the measure, it is imperative that regulators take into account the potential consequences for international trade when designing such programmes.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 360-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kholofelo Kugler

Indonesia challenged two measures of the United States' (US): first, the imposition of anti-dumping and countervailing duties (CVDs) on certain coated paper from Indonesia. In particular, Indonesia challenged certain aspects of the US States Department of Commerce (USDOC) final determination ‘as applied’ in its CVD investigation on certain coated paper from Indonesia, and the US International Trade Commission's (USCIT) final threat of injury determination regarding subsidized and dumped imports from Indonesia and China. Second, Indonesia challenged ‘as such’ Section 711(11)(B) of the US Tariff Act. In particular, Indonesia challenged the use of this provision in affirmative threat of injury determinations.


2000 ◽  
Vol 9 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 85-105
Author(s):  
Steven Hugh Lee

AbstractSince December 1997, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the Republic of Korea (ROK), and the United States have met in a series of talks aimed at promoting peace and stability on the Korean peninsula and in the region. According to a November 1998 U.S. Department of Defense report, the discussions have created a “diplomatic venue for reducing tensions and ultimately replacing the Armistice Agreement with a permanent peace settlement.”1 Amidst the tragic human suffering which has occurred in North Korea, there have been some encouraging developments on the peninsula. The 1994 Agreed Framework between the United States and North Korea placed international controls on North Korea’s atomic energy program and cautiously anticipated the normalization of U.S.-DPRK relations. Since assuming power in early 1998, South Korean President Kim Dae Jung has vigorously pursued a policy of engagement with P’yo¨ngyang, known as the “sunshine policy.” Over the past decade, North Korea has also reoriented its foreign policy. In the early 1990s, the regime’s social and economic crisis led to a rethinking of its autarkic economic system. By early 1994, the state had created new free trade zones and relatively open foreign investment laws.2 By complying with the Agreed Framework, the DPRK has also shown a willingness to work with the international community on sensitive issues affecting its internal sovereignty and ability to project power beyond its borders.


Author(s):  
Alexander Zhebin

The article analyzes the prospects for US-North Korean and inter-Korean relations, taking into account the completed policy review of the new US administration towards the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), as well as the results of the President of the Republic of Korea Moon Jae-in’s trip to Washington in May 2021 and his talks with US President Joe Biden. It is concluded that the “new" course proposed by the United States in relation to the DPRK will not lead to a solution to the nuclear problem of the Korean Peninsula and will interfere with the normalization of inter-Korean relations. During his visit to the US President Moon failed to obtain the US consent on ROK more “independent policy” toward North Korea. In spite of lavish investments into US economy and other concessions, Seoul was forced to promise to coordinate his approaches to the DPRK with US and Japan and support US position on Taiwan straits and South China Sea. The author argues that in the current conditions, the introduction of a regime of arms limitation and arms control in Korea should be a necessary stage on the way to complete denuclearization of the peninsula. The transition to a such method of the settlement of the nuclear problem could lead to the resumption of the negotiation process, mutual concessions, including reductions in the level of military-political confrontation, partial or large-scale lifting of economic sanctions in exchange for North Korea's restrictions of its nuclear weapon and missile systems.


Jurnal ICMES ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-196
Author(s):  
Firmanda Taufiq

Throughout 2018, relations between Turkey and the United States seemed to deteriorate. The leaders of the two countries issued sharp diplomatic statements and the US even imposed economic sanctions on Turkey. This article aims to analyze how the future of relations between Turkey and the United States. Cooperation between the two has a long historical side after the Cold War. Relations between the two countries are based on various interests, both economic, political, military and security interests. The theory used in this study is the theory of national interest. The US has great interests in the Middle East and Turkey is the front-line ally in achieving those interests. However, there are many US foreign policies that ignore the Turkish concern and create tensions between the two countries. On the contrary, Turkey also has considerable economic interests, but the role of the government elite (in this case, President Erdogan) has a significant influence in the determination of Turkish foreign policy. The findings of this study, although it will go through complex challenges and processes, the US and Turkey will continue to maintain their relations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document